ALLIANCE FOR GREEN REVOLUTION IN AFRICA(AGRA)

PROGRAM FOR AFRICASEED SYSTEMS (PASS)

TERMINAL EVALUATION FOR PASSEXPIRED PROJECTS IN TANZANIA

DRAFT REPORT

OCTOBER 2011

PREPARED BY

KOBE KONSULT LTD

P. O. Box 32187 DSM

ALLIANCE FOR A GREEN REVOLUTION IN AFRICA (AGRA)

Program for Africa’s Seed

Systems (PASS)

PASS Expired Projects Evaluation in Tanzania Final Report – December 2011

Prepared by:

Kobe Konsult Ltd

JUED Business Centre,

34 Garden Road, Mikocheni A,

P.O. Box 32187,

Dar es Salaam

Phone: +255 22 277 4436 / 0754 300 767

Fax: +255 22 277 4426

2011

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. 5 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... 7 EXCECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 11

1.1 Overview of the Agricultural Sector in Tanzania ............................................................. 11 1.2 Constraints facing Agrodealers ........................................................................................ 12 1.3 Fertilizer usage ................................................................................................................ 12 1.4 Access to credit and financial services ............................................................................. 12 1.5 The status of the Seed Sector in Tanzania ........................................................................ 12 1.6 Evolution of the Seed Sector in Tanzania ......................................................................... 13 1.7 Constraints facing the Seed System Value chain .............................................................. 13 1.8 Overview of the PASS Program ...................................................................................... 15

1.8.1 Original goals and objectives of the PASS Sub program ........................................... 15 1.8.2 Program Objectives .................................................................................................. 15 1.8.3 Partners in the Tanzania’s Seed System Value Chain ................................................ 16 1.8.4 Priority Crops in Tanzania ........................................................................................ 17

1.9 Management and Institutional Arrangements ................................................................... 18 1.9.1 Management and structure at AGRA Level .............................................................. 18 1.9.2 Management at the country level .............................................................................. 18 1.9.3 Management under SUA .......................................................................................... 18 1.9.4 Management under MAFSC Breeders Projects ......................................................... 18 1.9.5 Management under – CNFA/TAGMARK ................................................................ 19 1.9.6 Management under Seed Companies ........................................................................ 19

2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 24 2.1 Evaluation Framework .................................................................................................... 24 2.2 Data Collection Method .................................................................................................. 24

2.2.1 Documents Review .................................................................................................. 24 2.2.2 In-Depth Interviews ................................................................................................. 24 2.2.3 Questionnaire and checklists .................................................................................... 24 2.2.4 Key Informant method ............................................................................................. 24 2.2.5 Direct Observation ................................................................................................... 25 2.2.6 Sampling and Sample Size Determination ................................................................ 25

2.3 Field Work Coordination ................................................................................................. 26 2.3.1 The Evaluation Team and Working Protocol ............................................................ 27 2.3.2 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................... 27 2.3.3 Evaluation indicator for different sub-programmes ................................................... 27

3.0 RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION ................................................................................... 30 3.1 Overall AGRA support in Tanzania ................................................................................ 30 3.2 Projects Supported Under the Training Component (EACI) ............................................ 31

3.2.1 MSc Training in Plant Breeding and Related FieldsatSUA –Morogoro–(2007 PASS 052)Coordinated by Dr Cornel Rweyemamu .......................................................... 31

3.3 Projects Supported Under the Breeding Subprogram (FIAAC) ......................................... 34 3.3.1 Developing and Disseminating Improved Maize Varieties in Tanzania for Food

Security and Improved Household Income – (2007 PASS 004) by Dr. C. Kuwite ... 35 3.3.2: Towards improvement of African Crops: Production Testing Promotion and

distribution of hybrid maize cultivars in the high and intermediate altitude zones of Tanzania – (PASS 003 OF 2007) Dr. N. G. Lyimo ................................................. 38

3

3.3.3 Addressing rural poverty in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania through improvement of Angular Leaf Spot and Anthracnose diseases resistance in common bean (Phaseolus Vulgaris) – (PASS 005 OF 2007) by Ms. Rose Mongi .................. 40

3.3.4: Farmer participatory improvement of cassava germplasm for farmer market/market preferred traits in Tanzania- (2007 PASS 009)-Dr. G. Mkamillo ............................. 42

3.4 Projects Supported under the Seed Production Subprogram (SEPA) ............................... 44 3.4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 44 3.4.2 KRISHNA SEED COMPANY Reducing Hunger and Poverty among Tanzanian

small scale farmers through the use of improved seed (2008 PASS 005). ................ 45 3.4.3 ZENOBIA SEED Ltd: Production and delivery of improved seed to poor small scale

farmers in Tanzania (2008 PASS 008)- ................................................................... 45 3.4.4 TANSEED International Ltd – Production and Dissemination of improved Seed of

Maize, Pigeon pea, and sesame in Tanzania (2007 PASS 004) ................................ 48 3.3.5 Ministry of Agriculture Livestock and Environment - Enhancing Farmers Initiatives

for Multiplication and dissemination of Cassava virus tolerant Planting Materials in Zanzibar (2007 PASS 025) - Haji H. Saleh ............................................................. 49

3.5 Projects Supported under the Agro-dealer Strengthening Subprogram (TASP) - ADP ..... 50 3.5.1 Preparation of the Tanzania Agricultural Inputs Access Framework – (2007 PASS

025) –by Dr. Msolla ............................................................................................... 51 3.5.2 Tanzania Agro dealers Strengthening Program (TASP) (2007 PASS 020 CNFA) by

Jason Scapone ........................................................................................................ 51 4.0 LESSONS LEARNED, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................ 56

4.1 Training Component (EACI) .......................................................................................... 56 4.2 Plant Breeding Research Component (FIACC) ............................................................... 57 4.3 Seed Production Projects Component (SEPA) ................................................................ 57 4.4 Tanzania Agro dealer Strengthening Programme (TASP) ............................................... 57

4.4.1 Agro-dealers Survey Findings ................................................................................ 57 4.4.2 Lessons Learnt ....................................................................................................... 63

4.5 Results from Farmers’ survey ......................................................................................... 64 4.5.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 64 4.5.2 Crops grown in the areas covered ........................................................................... 65

5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 68 6.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 69

7.1 Terms of Reference ........................................................................................................ 70 7.2: Instruments Used in Data Collection............................................................................... 73

7.2.1 Farmers Questionnaire ............................................................................................ 73 7.2.2 Breeders Questionnaire ........................................................................................... 74 7.2.3 Seed Companies Questionnaire ............................................................................... 75 7.2.4 Agro dealers Questionnaire..................................................................................... 76 7.2.5 Training sub component ......................................................................................... 77

7.4 Team composition .......................................................................................................... 79 7.5 List of people contacted.................................................................................................. 80

7.5.1 List of People contacted in- Zanzibar ...................................................................... 80 7.5.2 Agro-dealers contacted ........................................................................................... 80 7.5.3 People contacted at SUA ........................................................................................ 81 7.5.4 Other stakeholders contacted .................................................................................. 81

7.6 Issues raised during MTR (Sept) 2010 and current status (Sept 2011) ............................. 82

4

Tables

Table 1: Production of Major Food Crops in Tanzania ............................................................... 17

Table 2: Summary of Pass Opportunities grants made risk management and new risks emerging ................................................................................................................................................. 21

Table 3: List of stakeholders interviewed by their locations ....................................................... 25

Table 4: Sample size of the respondents (Farmers) .................................................................... 26

Table 5: Logical Frame table: (Summary of PASS activities, indicators, and outcome indicators) ................................................................................................................................................. 27

Table 6: List of PASS grantees in Tanzania between 2009 and 2009 .......................................... 30

Table 7: List of AGRA sponsored students registered at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA), Tanzania .......................................................................................................... 34

Table 8: Characteristics of released Maize varieties ................................................................... 36

Table 9: Observed and anticipated benefits from project activities ............................................. 37

Table 10: PASS Grants for seed companies and their locations .................................................. 44

Table 11: Constraints facing Zenobia seed, their Effect and strategies to overcome them ........... 48

Table 12: Achievements of TASP targets for the various components ........................................ 52

Table 13: Government Initiatives for Training Plant Breeders in Tanzania ................................. 56

Table 14: Maize varieties grown by farmers in different maize growing districts ....................... 66

Table 15: Proportion of cassava varieties planted in major cassava growing area (Bagamoyo and Kati districts) ............................................................................................................. 66

Table 16: Sources of information about seed (%) ....................................................................... 66

Figures

Figure 1: Proportion of funds for Tanzania grantee for different sub-programmes ...................... 30

Figure 2: Amount of fertilizer supplied by agro-dealers through voucher system in Metric Tons 58

Figure 3: Volume of improved maize seeds (in MT) supplied by surveyed agro-dealers ............. 59

Figure 4: Sources of initial investment of agro dealership .......................................................... 60

Figure 5: Mzee Apaikunda (Agro dealer) from Mbuguni ward in Meru District looking at a tractor granted by CNFA under TASP. ...................................................................................... 61

Figure 6(a): Certificates conferred to trained Agro dealers ......................................................... 62

Figure 6(b): Certificates conferred to trained Agro dealers ......................................................... 63

Figure 7: Basic characteristics of the respondents ...................................................................... 64

Figure 8: Average proportion of Farmers Growing different Crops ............................................ 65

Figure 9: Sources of information about new seed varieties in the market .................................... 67

5

Abbreviations

AANA Arusha Association National Agriculture

ADP Agro dealer Development Programme

AGITF Agricultural Input Trust Fund

AGRA Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa

ASA Agriculture Seed Agency OR African Seed Agency

ASDP Agriculture Sector Development Programme

ASO Agricultural Services Officers

BAA Bagamoyo Agro-dealers Association

BFSO Business and Financial Services Officer

CAN Calcium Ammonium Nitrate

CBSD Cassava Brown Streak Diseases

CGIAR Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research

CGIR Consultative Group of International Research

CIAT Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical

CNFA Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs

COSTECH Commission for Science and Technology

CRS Catholic Relief Services

DALDO District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officer

DALDO District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officer

DAP Diammonium Phosphate

DFID Department for International Development

DRD Director of Research and Development

DUS Distinctness Uniformity and Stability

DUS Uniformity and Stability Analysis

EACI Education for African Crop Improvement

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FIAAC Fund for the Improvement and Adoption of Africa Crops

GDP Gross Domestic Products

GOT Government of Tanzania

ICRISAT International Centre for Research in the Semiarid tropics

ICRISAT International Centre for Research in the Semi-arid Tropics

IPM Integrated Pest Management

ISFM Integrated Soil Fertility Management

LGA Local Government Authority

LOA Letter of Agreement

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MADA Meru Agro dealers Association

MAFS Ministry of Agriculture Food Security and Cooperatives

MAFSC Ministry of Agriculture Food Security and Cooperatives

MT Metric Tons

MT Metric Tons

MTR Implementation of Mid Term Review Recommendations

NAIVS National Agricultural Input Voucher System

NARS National Agricultural Research Systems

NGO Non- Governmental Organization

NGO Non- Governmental Organizations

NMB National Microfinance bank

6

NPT National Performance Trial

NPT National Performance Trials

OPV Open Pollinated Varieties

PASS Program for Africa Seed Systems

QDS Quality Declared Seed

SARI Selian Agricultural Research Institute

SEPA Seed Production for Africa

SHP Soil Health Programme

SHZ Southern Highlands Zone

SUA Sokoine University of Agriculture

TAGMARK Tanzania Agricultural Market Development Trust

TANADA Tanzania National Agro dealers Association

TANADA Tanzania National Agro dealers Association

TASP Tanzania Agro dealer strengthening Progamme

TASTA Tanzania Seed Trade Association

TFC Tanzania Fertilizer company

TIB Tanzania Investment Bank

TMVI Tanzania Maize Variety I

TOR Terms of Reference

TOSCI Tanzania Official Seed Certification Agency

TPRI Tropical Pesticides Research Institute

USA United States of America

VRSCC Variety Release Seed Certification Committee

7

Acknowledgements

The evaluation team wishes to acknowledge the support provided by AGRA to undertake this assignment. The consultants also wish to recognize the facilitation provided by Kobe Konsult Ltd. to conduct the field work, analysis of the data collected and compilation of the report. The cooperation extended to the team by the various grantees, and other beneficiaries of the PASS projects, by providing the necessary documents and information required by the evaluation team is appreciated. The contribution of key consultants engaged in the evaluation Dr Adolph S. Nyaki (Team leader), Prof Joseph P. Hella (Deputy Team Leader), Robert Kileo, Abiud Bongole, Frank Lyimo and George Mziray (Coordinator)) is acknowledged.

8

EXCECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents an evaluation of 11 expired PASS projects. The report has been prepared by KOBE Konsult Ltd. located in Dar es Salaam. The evaluation was carried out from September 2011 to October 2011 and is centered on the overall mission of the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) within the framework of the Program for Africa’s Seed Systems (PASS). The Mission of PASS is to increase income, improve food Security and reduce poverty by promoting the development of seed system that delivers new crop technology to farmers in an efficient equitable and sustainable manner. The program composed of 4 components namely; (EACI), (FIAAC), (SEPA) and Agro-Dealers Development Program (ADP). This report is based on the analysis which is centered in these four components. The objective of the evaluation was to assess the extent to which major objectives of the program were achieved. In addition, the study documented how economically the projects converted inputs into results, whether the results have translated into benefits to the smallholder farmer and the likelihood of the continued long term benefits from the project results.

Capacity Building of Breeders (Training) The PASS Program was intended to dramatically increase Africa’s capacity to breed, produce and disseminate quality seed of staple food crops. However, professional plant breeders in most African countries including Tanzania are very few as a result of aging and retirement resulting in limited quality and quantity of breeding activities. The African Centre for Crop Improvement (ACCI) under AGRA Support aimed to train African plant breeders in Eastern and Southern Africa at the PHD level and MSc Programs at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA). Since 2006 the program has led to the production of more than five plant breeders in Tanzania who are currently working in various crops including rice, maize, and cassava. The support for PhD was very effective since it has added knowledge to young researchers who have become more competent in aspects of plant breeding. In addition, since the majority of the graduates were employed by government institutions or local authorities, the multiplier effect to the communities around them will likely be high. One of the major concerns of the MSc students at SUA was delayed disbursement of their research funds which has led to a request for extension of their program.

Support to Breeding Research (FIAAC)

This component funded crop breeding initiatives to improve maize, beans and cassava varieties as well as promote their adoption by smallholder farmers. During the review the team interviewed a total of 4 grantees one from Selian and 2 from Uyole and 1 from ARI Naliendele. Based on the interviews it was revealed that a total of four (4) maize hybrids and eight (8) improved cassava varieties were released while six (6) lines of maize 4 lines of cassava and 5 lines of beans were in the final stages of release as of December2010. The released hybrid maize varieties (Selian 208, Selian 308,UHS5350 and UHS5210) have yields ranging from 8.0-8.5 tons per hectare while the yield potential of open pollinated maize varieties (e.g. Staha, Kito, Katumani and Kilima) have lower yield potentials of less than 4 tons/ha and are as well susceptible to maize streak disease.

Overall, the grantees showed clear understanding of the context of their research and were confident that the technologies they have generated were sustainable and that the released varieties would result in significant increase in yield and contribute to farmers’ income for the maize grain sold. In the long run, it is anticipated that the project outputs (networking, germplasm

9

materials, farmer participation and released varieties) will benefit the research system (NARS) at different levels. There were no major problems encountered by the grantees in this component except the fact that the timeframe allocated to most projects particularly the cassava project was too short to complete the entire breeding process.

Support to Seed Production Companies (SEPA) PASS provided grants to 5 seed companies in Tanzania (Southern Highland, Krishna Seed, Zenobia seed, Tanseed International &Zanzibar Cassava seed programme) to support production and marketing of more locally bred varieties including the less commercial or orphan crops such as beans, sorghum, pigeon peas, lablab and sunflower. The team noted that local seed companies that have the potential to produce and distribute locally bred seed have been slow in taking the central role in seed production and marketing mainly due to lack of capital to invest in sound seed business.

The quantities of maize, sorghum and pigeon pea seed produced by Zenobia Seed Company as well as Krishna seed companies was close to the proposed tonnage in the first year, but in the subsequent years yields were significantly reduced by drought stress. The two companies could not access the AGRA loan facility (ASIF and WAAIF) which has led to considerable cash flow problems in addition to the drought stress which further limited seed production. In contrast, a substantial impact on cassava multiplication in Zanzibar was reported. It was also noted that support to local seed companies should go hand in hand with facilitation of other stakeholders in the seed system such as the Tanzania Official Seed Certification Institute (TOSCI), Plant Breeders Rights Registration, Tanzania Pesticide Research Institute (TPRI), for the Quarantine and Phyto-sanitary services. These institutions had very limited resources for them to play their expected roles the seed industry adequately. Zenobia Seed Company has made substantial efforts in the dissemination of improved seed including establishment of 4 demonstration sites, which attracted about 120 farmers and printed 15,000 copies of brochures and distributed them to stakeholders. Support to Agro dealer development Program (ADP) CNFA through its local affiliate TAGMARK had a major goal of building an efficient, commercially viable input supply structure through government policy advocacy, business management, technical knowledge financial services and demand generation for improved agricultural inputs. The program concentrated in the Northern and Southern Highlands Zone. CNFA/TAGMARK activities in Tanzania were very extensive both in area and coverage, number of farmers reached and the horizontal and vertical network established. The programme largely implemented the Government of Tanzania (GOTs) vision of input subsidy scheme through National Agricultural Input Voucher Schemes (NAIVS). The activities reported is a mix of the original TASP initiative (implemented in 17 districts), and the expansion phase TASP E funded by the SHP, which led to the expansion of the program to 42 districts where 1,631.agrodealers have been trained and certified. A spillover effect of the program led to additional funding from MAFSC under the Agro dealer Training Project (ADT), in which 1,025 agro dealers in additional 38 districts were trained and certified.

10

Major challenges documented by the team include limited number of staff in relation to the fast rate of expansion of the program into new districts. This is further complicated by a high staff turnover at all levels including the top management limiting the smooth continuity of the programme. Limited training in IPM and ISFM was also noted by the team. The need to strengthen the Agro dealers’ networks, and linking them to output marketing was also highlighted. Long administrative and protocols (CNFA USA, CNFA Nairobi, CNFA Tanzania to TAGMARK)limit speedy decision making. It was also evident from the evaluation that the benefits from the credit guarantee scheme was not optimized, an observation that was also noted by the MTR team in 2010. The proportion of farmers using improved seed was higher in areas with good agricultural potential For example, seventy two percent (72%) of cassava growers used improved planting materials raised from Kizimbani Zanzibar, while 26 % of maize growers in Arumeru and 72% of maize growers in Mbozi planted improved seeds from SEEDCo Seed Company. Similar trend for beans was reported for beans in Mbozi district (41%) and rice growers (36%). Cassava varieties grown included Kizimbani, Mfaranza, Machui, Kiroba, Kiposa while those of maize included SEEDCo, Panner, Staha, Hybrid, Situka, Uyole 615 and Staha.

The main source of information about seed is other farmers (43.8%) Seed stores (14.2%) and government officials (Research and Extension) (13.8 %) while the main source of seed is through exchange by other farmers (36.1%) extension staff (15.7%) research institutions (13.9%) and Farmer.

11

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview of the Agricultural Sector in Tanzania Agriculture is the foundation of Tanzania’s economy. It accounts for almost 26% GDP, 75% of merchandise exports, and provides employment opportunities for about 80% of Tanzanians. The agricultural sector has forward and backward linkages to the non-farm sector through agro-processing, consumption and export, provision of raw materials to industries, and as a market for manufactured goods.

Tanzania has relatively abundant land resources with cultivable area estimated at 40 million ha (42% of the total land area). Of this area, 3.7 million ha (34%) are estimated to be under annual crops (SFI 1996/97). The dominantly small scale farming nature of the agricultural sector which constitutes the backbone of the economy is characterized by poor returns to land and labour. On much of the land, the productive potential is not realized due to inappropriate land use systems and practices leading to declining productivity.

Farm sizes range between 1 and 3 hectares and most smallholder farmers use the hand hoe as the main cultivating tool, while ox plows are used by about 20% of farmers and tractors by only 10%. Smallholder farmers use household labor and mutual assistance between families for agricultural activities during peak periods of planting, weeding and harvesting. Women are generally responsible for weeding, harvesting and clearing the fields. A wide variety of crops can be grown in Tanzania due to its climatic variation and agro-ecological conditions. However, the low productivity on the part of small scale farmers constitutes a major constraint to growth in the agricultural sector.

In recent years, the GoT has focused much of its attention on poverty reduction guided by its poverty reduction strategy. The primary objective includes agricultural sector and rural development components and seeks to stimulate growth in the rural economy by building on gains in the national economy and by empowering the rural poor to overcome extreme poverty through better access to land, water, financial resources and markets. Within the agricultural sector, food crop producers are generally poorer than cash crop farmers, but both face structural constraints and lack market linkages, inputs and credits. In an attempt to address this need, the GoT is currently implementing a subsidy programs for fertilizer, seed and some pesticides.

The implementation arrangement of the subsidy initiative involves private companies that import and deliver inputs to regional centers across the country. From regional centers, District Subsidy Committees appoint agrodealers to participate in the distribution of the inputs at district level. The GoT is currently subsidizing transport costs and partially subsidizing fertilizer costs for selected fertilizers (DAP, Urea and CAN).

Until the late 1980s, the supply and distribution of agricultural inputs were managed exclusively by the GoT through parastatal institutions such as Tanzania Fertilizer Co. (TFC), which supplied all of the fertilizer in the country. Public and quasi-public institutions such as Cooperative Unions, Primary Societies, Regional Tradining Centers and Marketing Boards were in charge of secondary input distribution to farmers.Under this system, inputs and outputs were directly linked; cooperatives would supply inputs on credit to farmers and turn around and buy outputs at the end of the season, deducting the cost of inputs. Often, farmers were unaware that they were paying for inputs.

In the early 1990s, the government-directed input distribution system went into decline. Public institutions had been performing poorly in input distribution and the system was wrought with inefficiencies due to the long bureaucratic planning processes required, untimely delivery, massive inventories of excess inputs, and a high default rate on loans from the institutions. The

12

GoT liberalization of the input markets annual fertilizer consumption dropped to 70,000 MT. As a result the government decided to subsidize fertilizers in 2004 to promote fertilizer use by smallholder farmers.

1.2 Constraints facing Agrodealers Fertilizer prices in Tanzania are quite high compared to other countries in the region. Farmers in Ethiopia for example pay an average of $300 per metric ton whereas Tanzanian farmers pay up to $600 per metric ton. The disparity is due to transportation costs and high taxation. While input prices at regional centers are quite uniform throughout the country, due to the bulky nature of fertilizer, the sizable distances to be covered and the onerous unfaforable terrain, in remote areas, transportation costs are high for agrodealers to move inputsfrom the regional centres to their shops. As a result, remotely located agrodealers’ profit margains are greately reduced. To mitigate these costs, agro dealers concentrate in a few major district towns, making inputs less available in rural areas. Therefore the fertilizer business has not been a very lucrative business venture for agro dealers due to low profit margins.

Demand-side constraints also impede business due to the fact that fertilizer has strongly seasonal demand, farmer have been unaccustomed to investing in fertilizer because it was perceived as free under the parastatal system and quality standards are not enforced or clearly communicated.

1.3 Fertilizer usage Fertilizer consumption is very low in Tanzania at about 9 kg per hectare, about one sixth the average usages in South Africa. Only 15% of holdings employ some sort of mineral fertilizer, mainly nitrogen, and doses are diluted below the recommended concentrations as a mechanism to reduce the risk and sunk costs associated with crop failure. The Deep South has the highest fertilizer consumption rates; roughly 65% of subsidized fertilizer in recent years has been consumed in the region. Even so, only one third of Southern Highland farmers use fertilizer. A majority of Deep South farmers source their fertilizer through cooperatives such as the Tanzania Farmers’ Association.

1.4 Access to credit and financial services The major fertilizer suppliers have few links to their customers other than actual point of sale transactions, normally conducted on a cash-only basis. This implies that if the agrodealers have limited cash they can buy only limited quantities of inputs at any one given time, consequently restricting the availability of inputs to farmers. However, on a positive note, bank credit is becoming increasingly available in the Deep South.

1.5 The status of the Seed Sector in Tanzania Seed is an important input in Agriculture. The use of good quality seed of adapted and improved varieties along with other inputs and appropriate cultural practices is the most cost effective way of achieving advances in crop production and productivity. Therefore, a program that is capable of providing farmers with good quality seed is essential to Tanzania’s agricultural based economy. Tanzania’s total seed requirement is estimated to be 120,000 tons per annum. The formal seed system supplies between 10,000 -15,000 tons per annum of which only 4,000 tons are produced locally (about 10% of total seed needs). The rest is imported by Multinational Seed Companies primarily from Kenya, Zimbabwe and South Africa. In an effort to increase the availability of

13

improved seed MAFSC supports the production of Foundation Seed and the development of local seed enterprises. 1.6 Evolution of the Seed Sector in Tanzania Tanzania’s seed system is relatively well developed compared to other African countries. The research institutions are functioning reasonably well albeit with the usual constraints in terms of resources. Tanzania has the legal regulatory framework in place to support the development of a private seed sector. Although there are a large number of seed companies in the country local firms that produce and distribute locally bred seed are at an early stage of development. There are 34 registered seed companies in Tanzania 12 of which are producing certified seed. Public production of foundation and certified seed rely on 5 publicly owned seed farms. These seed Farms have recently been taken over by a new publicly owned parastatal called the Tanzania Seed Agency (ASAs). The role of this agency is developing but in principle could be an important vehicle for the continued production of foundation seed and less commercial seed. Networks of Agro dealers exist in the Arusha area and in the Southern Highlands where the greatest agricultural activities take place. Key laws governing the seed system are the Seed Act (2003) and Plant Breeders Act (2002). Currently, several multi-national seed companies (Pannar, Monsanto, Pioneer, Seed Co, Kenya Seed Company, FICA Seeds, Kibo Seed, and East African Seeds) have entered the market, and some local seed companies (TANSEED International, Suba Agro, Southern Highlands Seed Growers, Zenobia Seeds, Krishna Seeds, Alpha Seeds) have also come into the market. However there is concern from the government that the commercialization of smallholder agriculture is being held back by the limited development of the agricultural inputs sector. The few seed companies that are active in the market are focusing on the supply of hybrid maize and yet the country has a diverse set of agro-ecologies with smallholder farmers producing a range of different crops that are often better suited to some of the more marginal areas. This imbalance is expected to be addressed through ASA. The ICRISAT-led Sustainable Commercialization of Seeds in Africa (SCOSA) program is working with this Agency to improve the linkages between foundation seed companies and local seed enterprises.

The government also recognizes the role of the private sector in bringing about socio-economic development through investments. Private Public Partnership (PPP) frameworks provide important instruments for attracting investments. PPP has been identified as viable means to effectively address constraints of financing managing and maintaining public goods and services. The private seed companies should exploit this opportunity to improve their seed production business. PPP s can enable the government to fulfill its responsibilities in efficient delivery of socio-economic goods and services by ensuring efficiency, effectiveness accountability, quality and outreach services

1.7 Constraints facing the Seed System Value chain The network of Agro dealers in Tanzania is weak. Access to credit for general business is limited and the agronomic skills required for appropriate input use is weak. Production of foundation and certified seed for non-commercial varieties and difficult to produce seed e.g. beans is limited and not reliable. The distribution is still ad-hoc and taking over of the system by Agricultural Seed Agency (ASA) has not made much difference. Unfortunately,

14

production and processing of seed by the private sector is hampered by lack of access to credit as well as irrigated land. Breeding programmes continue to produce new varieties of various crops. However, the level of funding for research as well as maintenance of breeders seed constrains the outputs from such breeders.

15

1.8 Overview of the PASS Program

1.8.1 Original goals and objectives of the PASS Sub program

The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is a partnership of the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and UK Department for International Development (DFID) working with African Governments, other donors, NGOs the Private Sector and African farmers to significantly and sustainably improve the productivity and incomes of resource poor farmers in Africa. AGRA’s vision is that of a food secure and prosperous Africa achieved through rapid, sustainable agricultural growth based on smallholder farmers who are primarily engaged in the production of staple food crops in Africa. The main goals of AGRA by 2020 are to: i) Reduce food insecurity by 50 percent in at least 20 countries ii) Double the incomes of 20 million smallholder families and iii) Put at least 30 countries on track towards attaining and sustaining a uniquely African Green Revolution. AGRA’s strategy operates across four programmatic areas which work in an integrated manner across all three portfolios, the Seeds, Soil health, Market Access and Policy and Partnerships. Other areas such as water, extension, gender and youth will be incorporated into the four programs. The Program for African Seed System (PASS) which started in 2007 funds agro-ecology based crop breeding by national and local research programs; coordinates with the CGIAR system to rapidly disseminate existing improved seed varieties; fosters the development of a vibrant, competitive seed sector; supports the development of national agro-dealer networks- village retailers who get farm inputs to remote farmers; partners with African universities to train the next generation of African agricultural scientists; and advocates for seeds regulatory frameworks that make high quality, affordable seed available to smallholder farmers.

1.8.2 Program Objectives

PASS consists of four sub-programs that focus on different elements of the input supply value chain. These are education for African Crop Improvement (EACI), the Fund for the improvement and adoption of African Crops ((FIAAC), The Seed Production for Africa Initiative (SEPA) and the Agro dealer Development Program (ADP). The Program objectives are organized in terms of the major results that are expected from each of the four subprograms: EACI provides funding for the training of new generation of crop breeders and agricultural scientists upon which seed systems depend for growth and productivity. Training under this subprogram is conducted in nine (9) universities across seven (7) countries and has primarily focused on Master’s and Doctoral levels and has up to December 2010 successfully graduated about forty (40) students. These graduates are expected to join the critical mass of scientists developing improved seed varieties in research institutions across Africa FIAAC funds crop breeding in Africa to improve African crop varieties and promote their adoption by smallholder farmers. FIAAC has facilitated the release and dissemination of over 154 improved varieties across 13 sub-Saharan African countries by December 2010and is expected to

16

boost the yield levels of smallholder farmers. These released improved varieties should reach the smallholder farmers through the activities of the seed companies and agro dealers. SEPA helps ensure that improved crop varieties are produced and distributed through the private and public channels (including seed companies, publicly supported seed programs and public extension) so that farmers can adopt these varieties. SEPA through its support to small private seed companies has supported the production and distribution of 25,000MT of improved seed varieties across 13 sub-Saharan African countries. ADP provides training and credit to establish and support the growth of small agro dealers who are a primary conduit of seeds fertilizers and knowledge on their proper use to smallholder farmers to increase their productivity and incomes. ADP has facilitated the training of over 9000 rural agro dealers across 9 sub-Saharan African countries with the objective of delivering improved inputs to smallholder farmers in an affordable, efficient and effective manner.

1.8.3 Partners in the Tanzania’s Seed System Value Chain

The Tanzania’s Seed System Value chain involves the following factors:

• Local variety breeders

• Variety registration

• Foundation seed production

• Seed production

• Seed processing

• Seed marketing and promotion

• Seed distribution

• Seed certification /regulation Local variety breeding is done by 12 Agricultural Research Institutions. The ARIs are zonal based and focus on crops and issues relevant to their particular ecologies. The extent of actual breeding work taking place varies between research institutions. New varieties are then submitted to the Tanzania Official Seed Certification Institution (TOSCI) for Durability, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) Test and then for National Performance Trials (NPTs) for 2 years. The five Government Foundation Seed Farms are responsible for the production processing and distribution of foundation (basic seed) using breeder’s seed supplied by ARIs. The Seed Farms have recently been transferred to the Tanzania Seed Agency (ASA). TOSCI carries out the inspection of the Foundation Seed production. In some instances breeders are also producing Foundation seed where they feel that the Foundation seed Farms are not delivering quality seed. The Tanzania Official Seed Certification Institution carries out quality assurance of certified seed through both field inspection (for isolation and characteristics) and sampling for purity and germination. Private Seed Companies are free to distribute and market their seed in branded bags directly through stockiest. The collapse of cooperative unions means that the distribution of non-commercial seed varieties is relatively ad-hoc and relies on stockiest/farmers going directly to the foundation seed farms or through an NGO involvement. Distribution of seed and other inputs is mainly undertaken by private agro dealers (about 90% of all inputs in Tanzania)

17

1.8.4 Priority Crops in Tanzania

Although priority crops and their distribution by agro ecological zones was not adequately covered in the business plan one can generally divide the country in the northern and southern Highlands zone where maize beans potatoes and wheat are the major crops while sorghum millet maize oilseed crops and paddy rice for the central zone which is largely semiarid. According to the business plan the most important crops are cassava, maize, rice sorghum beans and sweet potatoes and millet. Maize is the most important and most preferred crop in Tanzania and accounts for 31% of the total food production in Tanzania (see Table 1). Maize production levels have varied from as low as 1.8 million tons to as high as 2.7 million tons over the last 5 years, depending on the season. The average production is about 2.3 million tons per year. Small-scale farmers dominate the maize production practices in Tanzania and together they account for 85% of the total production. Medium and large scale farmers account for 10% and 5% of the total production respectively. Rice is the second most preferred staple after maize. It is estimated that rice constitutes 17% of cereal consumption in Tanzania. In terms of production levels, Tanzania ranks second after Madagascar as a major rice producer in Eastern and Southern Africa. All regions in Tanzania grow rice but at different levels of importance. Annual production has been fluctuating between 500,000 and 850,000 tons per annum. Like maize rice is also produced by smallholder farmers owning 0.5-2.4 ha and account for about 94% of the national production. Cassava is one of the important food crops grown in Tanzania providing energy from its roots, and protein, minerals and vitamins from the leaves. The advantage of cassava over the other staple crops is tolerance to drought, capacity to provide yields in agro ecologies and seasons where other crops would fail, low requirement for external inputs like fertilizers, flexibility in planting and harvesting time and convenient in ground storability. Table 1: Production of Major Food Crops in Tanzania

Crop Year 2000 Year2005 Year 2008 Acreage Prod Yield Acreage Prod Yield Acreage Prod Yield

Maize 1870384 2,009,318 1.07 3,001,337 3,218,540 1.07 2,600,341 3,302,058 1.27

Pulses 815105 673,713 0.83 1,147,954 885,804 0.77 1,147,508 1,155,985 1.01

Cassava 809959 5,342,106 0.60 906,387 5,539,162 6.11 779067 5,198,934 6.67

Sorghum 763173 667023 0.91 868,966 714339 0.82 817,946 971,198 1.19

Rice 516944 762086 1.51 684,375 1,168,286 1.71 557,981 1,341,835 2.40

Potatoes 416427 2,393,149 5.75 554,788 2,792,803 5.03 664,414 3,964,784 5.97

Banana 303526 2,107,634 6.94 423,420 2,971,721 7.02 404,428 3,082,606 7.62

Millet 251927 150,185 0.60 210,942 220,940 1.05 208216 193,975 0.93

Wheat 71683 32,790 0.46 93,327 101,912 1.09 75,369 82,784 1.10

Note: Production figures for 2009 and 2010 were not available during the evaluation

18

1.9 Management and Institutional Arrangements

1.9.1 Management and structure at AGRA Level

The proposed corporate structure of PASS and governance arrangements ensures a clear separation of responsibilities for setting and monitoring program strategy and management of operations and key roles and responsibilities at each level. The PASS Director reports to the Program Director and Board. The latter approves and provides fiduciary oversight for the various initiatives of the programs and their funding plans. In running the day-to-day operations of the program, the PASS Director is supported by a professional management team and administrative staff responsible for the planning, implementation and supervision of the sub-programs. The strategy for achieving the PASS mission sets out the key principles of decision making. The governance structure is intended to support the achievement of the strategy by ensuring operational flexibility and robust decision making, whilst also allowing for wider stakeholder communications and policy support. The management structure and rules of governance is intended to evolve over time in line with the growth of program activities.

1.9.2 Management at the country level

At the country level the management structure of PASS is governed by the structure of the institution/organization receiving the grant In this respect the institutions receiving the PASS support in Tanzania include SUA (training) , MAFSC ( Plant Breeders ), Seed companies , and NGO such as CNFA/TAGMARK (Tanzania Agro dealer Strengthening Programme).

1.9.3 Management under SUA

The university has a directorate of Research and Postgraduate studies which was established in 1988. Its responsibilities include coordination of research activities, managing and facilitating the dissemination of research findings and results maintaining an inventory of research facilities, soliciting and administration of research funds. The universities research motto is to encourage multidisciplinary research for sustainable development and poverty alleviation.

1.9.4 Management under MAFSC Breeders Projects

The researchers receiving respective research grants are located in various research institutes. The institute director is supposed oversees all the research activities implemented at the institute including the PASS Program activities. The director is supported by various staff members including financial officers, procurement unit, and an administrative officer. The directors of research institutions report to zonal research centers under the zonal director for research and development (ZD) who then reports to the Director of Research and Development of the Ministry of Agriculture and food security (MAFC). At the ministry level the Director of research and development assisted by respective assistant directors is responsible for providing guidance to all research activities in the country under MAFSC and reports to the Principal. Secretary of MAFSC The PASS proposals are usually endorsed by the PS MAFSC on behalf of the Tanzanian government. Grantees are usually supposed to involve all these stakeholders from the proposal development stage to project implementation, through various forums including workshops,

19

inception meetings and various M&E sessions. Approval of various technical and financial progress reports involve key officers of MAFSC particularly the directors of the institutes.

1.9.5 Management under – CNFA/TAGMARK

TASP was managed through Tanzania’s CNFA Country director/TAGMARKs Managing director based in Dar es Salaam. The director was responsible for program operations, overseeing the southern Highlands Manager based in Mbeya, and managing activities in the five Fast Track districts (Morogoro, Mvomero, and Kilosa), and the Northern Zone area Manager managing activities in the eight Northern Districts. The country director will also take the responsibility for directing the capital Fund for matching grants, and loans, including the establishment of the independent grant award Committee publicizing the program and managing the application and award process. In Dar es Salaam the Country Director will interact with MAFSC, Tanzania Fertilizer Partnership members ASA, AIGTF ACT and lead CNFAs policy advocacy efforts. The DSM office will also serve as the country hub with M&E accounting and capacity building. The country director will report to CNFAs director of Africa Programs based in Nairobi. The Business and Financial Services Officers (BFSO) managed all activities related to business management training, oversee the capital fund and administer guarantee agreements with supply companies and financial institutions. The BFSOs also designed and adapted training modules recruit trainers for TOT, and certified trained agro-dealers. The BFSO also coordinated with MFIs to assure that the voucher Programme integrated with the credit provided, monitor the reimbursement process for operational efficiency, and manage the rollout of the information communication Solutions Programme. Agricultural services Officers (ASO) l interacted with Agro dealers and linked them to supply companies and extension staff to facilitate demonstration plots, field days, exhibitions and product specific trainings, as well as manage market surveying and manage the dissemination of the results. CNFA was composed of 38 staff members in TASP Offices in Mbeya DSM, Morogoro and Arusha. Currently, CNFA Tanzania is no longer operational, and TAGMARK has taken over the activities. TAGMARK is managed by a board of Trustees and Dr. Saadan is the interim Executive secretary.

1.9.6 Management under Seed Companies

a) Management of Krishna Seed Company

Krishna Seed Company was officially registered in 2001 and its farm is located in Manyara region. The company field activities are carried out at Magugu in Manyara region where it has a total land area of 2,589 hectares. The company has 13 full-time technical people in the fields of production management, seed technology, farm management, accountant, mechanic, storekeeper and drivers. Hired labor for various farm operations such as planting, weeding, harvesting and sorting is sought at peak periods.

b) Management of Zenobia Seeds Ltd Zenobia Seeds LTD is an agro seed company specializing in farming and marketing of agricultural products. It produces pigeon peas and flower seeds for export to European markets

20

and rice, maize pigeon peas, sunflower, bananas and sesame for local markets. The company has its office headquarters within the Arusha Municipality. The company was registered in 31st May 1999 with registration and started seed production in 2000 with authorized share capital of Tanzanian shillings 20 Million. The company is owned by 5 equal shareholders and operates with a sister transport company - Dodoma Transport Company Limited, which greatly supported it in the initial years of startup. Labour for field operations is provided by 340 farm workers during the labour peak periods of the season.

c) Management of TANSEED International Co. Ltd Tanseed International is an agro seed company specializing in farming and marketing of seed ranging from cereals and legume. The company is owned by 2 shareholders. With its headquarter in Morogoro, the company produce seed for both lowland and highland in Morogoro, Pwani, Tanga, Dodoma, Singida, Mwanza, Dodoma, Iringa, Mwanza, Shinyanga, Kigoma, and Ruvuma. Main crops are Maize, rice, beans, pigeon peas, sunflower, sesame and cowpea. With AGRA support the company now has employed 14 full time workers. More than 200 temporary employees work with the company during peak periods. According to the PASS business plan the Pass opportunities grants made risk management and new risks emerging is presented in Table 2.

21

Table 2: Summary of Pass Opportunities grants made risk management and new risks emerging EACI FIACC SEPA ADP Opportunities Identified Aging breeders suggest a

strong case for funding MSC and PHD positions. Sokoine University (SUA) in Tanzania is well placed to offer MSC courses SUA is developing links with ACCI for PhD training. Longer term opportunity to develop PhD training at SUA. Possible opportunities for in service and short term training of ARI breeders /technicians Funding required for equipment refresh and improvement (e.g. cold storage

The law and certification institutions are well developed. Real opportunities to fund increased breeding activity of existing breeders (given funding and equipment constraints) to increase outputs. There is a particular issue in terms of breeders seed (relation to both cold storage and funding for production) There is a potential for improved links within research community and with other stakeholders (e.g. seed farms and SMEs

There are a number of existing seed companies that have potential to benefit from (i) business development services (ii) access to credit (iii) funding of research and (iv) development of markets. Tanzania has already a relatively strong market for hybrids/OPV varieties of maize. There is a significant potential to improve production and distribution of less commercial seed (Scope to support TASTA)

Private sector agro wholesalers are relatively well established in some parts of the country but absent elsewhere. Possible opportunities to increase the coverage of agro dealers in rural areas in particular opportunities to provide (I) business development services, (ii) access to credit and (iii) support to development of markets

Activities Funded 2 PhD graduates from

ACCI in 2010 (Cassava and maize, 2 further PhD students in training at ACCI (rice and maize) and 7 candidates in MSc training at SUA

Beans – Ms Rose Mongi ARI Uyole Cassava-Dr Geofrey Mkamillo, ARI Naliendele Maize Dr Nick Lyimo ARI Uyole Soyabeans - Dr Catherine Madata ARI Uyole, Maize- Dr Catherine Kuwite ARI Selian

Krishna Seed Co Ltd Arusha Tanseed International Co Ltd Morogoro Zenobia Seed Co Ltd Arusha DRT Zanzibar - Cassava Itente seed Co Kagera Meru Agro Tours Co Ltd Northern Tanzania

CNFA-TADP Dr Kibibi Mtenga (late) National Microfinance bank (NMB) Mr Peter B. Shao and Augustino Chacha

Key Risks Government ban on ARIs recruitment discourage

Insufficient infrastructure and poor supporting

The seed certification, quality control and

CNFA/TASP is currently active in North and East

22

students to opt for training on crop breeding as their future carrier. There are as many PhDs that are not actively working in the field of plant breeding which reelect incentives and motivations of the system. Lack of training and laboratory facilities in identified universities and lack of funds to practice breeding after graduation. Few Tanzanians apply for PhD training at ACCI Mid-level breeding cadre has not receive training

facilities (such as power) constraints breeding Expensive variety registration process. Lack of trust between public crop breeders, private seed companies on variety ownership Royalty payments and breeders seed purchase requests are not been honored by seed companies

regulatory body TOSCI has inadequate funding and capacity to reach many places in the country. There may be an issue with poor breeder seed impacting quality of foundation seed produced and consequently the quality of seed produced by the seed companies. There is no PASS support to other seed systems components such as TOSCI which is important for successful variety release

and Southern Highlands of Tanzania CNFA/ TASP is grossly understaffed with high staff turnover thus limited programme continuity. Presence of a growing informal sector dealing in spurious and poor quality agricultural inputs. Low effective demand for inputs especially seed. Numerous small-scale farmers attend their crops in remote areas poorly served by farm supply retailers.

How risks were managed Sponsoring of new PhD

graduates from ACCI through FIAAC grants including partial salary support for grantees who are not established staff members. Graduates are given priority to obtain funds for breeding at their stations

Provision in FIAAC grants of funds for supporting facilities (vehicles, computers, cold rooms or other seed storage, Lab equipment etc.)

FIAAC grants also finance maintenance breeding to improve breeder seed quality. TOSCI has been given full responsibility for variety testing and release, seed certification and regulation but not resourced accordingly

CNFA/TASP extended to other regions through ADP grant. Enhanced linkages of Agro dealers with bona fide suppliers squeezing crooks out of the market. Promotion activities to enhance the demand for inputs

New risks emerging SME seed companies not

able to fund breeding positions and absorb new graduates

Loss of staff to non-breeding positions Failure of seed companies to take up new varieties of

Weak enforcement of regulation of the seed sector undermines progress of formal seed systems

Financial sustainability of TASP suspect. Relationship between CNFA and TASP is not

23

Declining interest by young generation to take science subjects New threats of climate change and variability

some crops for commercialization. Capacity of SME seed companies to host breeding projects questionable

thereby increasing the number of multinational seed companies importing seed from abroad

very elaborate

A4D overall judgment Tanzania’s needs for new graduates in plant breeding are being served at both PhD and MSc level but the number is still too small SUA offers for unique location for training requirements for other AGRA programmes

PASS support to breeding is making a slight contribution to solving ARIs problems of succession and lack of funds for breeding. The role of breeders in the SME seed companies remains unclear.

Support to TOSCI would address many weaknesses in the Tanzanian seed systems

CNFA/TASP will make good and sustaining progress if it works with local authorities

1Grantees interviewed. 2 Grant memos not available

24

2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY 2.1 Evaluation Framework The framework for the evaluation was along the lines of: Projects design and structure; Projects relevance and rationale; Projects effectiveness and efficiency; Projects impacts and sustainability; and lessons learnt as outlined in the inception report. 2.2 Data Collection Method

2.2.1 Documents Review

Key project documents were reviewed in order to understand the project and put in context the project in question. The documents reviewed included the all expired project proposals and databases, the signed contracts between AGRA and grantees, various grantee progress reports to AGRA. In addition, the Program officers’ reports, financial records and other program related reports.

2.2.2 In-Depth Interviews

In-depth interviews were conducted with all program Grant recipients (i.e. under ACCI, EACI, SEPA and TASP). In addition stakeholders in seed value chain, channels of distributions, and farmers was done to gather their opinions about the project in terms of objectives, achievements and the likelihood of continued long term benefits from project outputs/results. People interviewed included lecturers and graduates from the MSc plant breeding/plant pathology program, relevant officers at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives (MAFSC).At the MAFSC interviews were conducted to get first-hand information about policy perspectives on agriculture sector/environment in Tanzania and how AGRA’s activities fit into the national policy initiatives. The list of people met is presented in Annex 7.5)

2.2.3 Questionnaire and checklists

Checklists and questionnaires were administered for gathering qualitative and quantitative information from key stakeholders along the seed systems value chain. Using semi-structure and or structured questionnaires developed by AGRA and slightly modified to suit Tanzanians situation (see Appendix 7.2), specific aspects relevant respective to specific grantee were administered. For the training sub programs, the issues that were tracked were centered on the cost of training graduates, number of graduates admitted, currently on progress and those already completed their training. In addition about the where about of the graduates and how the course has influenced their research activities were sought. Breeders were requested to give data on the number of varieties released vis-a-vis the projected target in their proposals and how the released are featuring in the seed market. The key issues identified pertaining seeds production was the quantum of seed produced and where, when how was its channel of distribution from seed farms to small farmers. Specific checklists were directed to producers, agro-dealers, and farmers

2.2.4 Key Informant method

This was used to capture information from key project stakeholders for example from Agro-dealers and input sellers, and input suppliers specific service providers and other stakeholders in seed and related sector.

25

2.2.5 Direct Observation

The method was used to complement the data collected through farmer questionnaires and also was useful in understanding the context in which information is collected. The questionnaires used to interview farmers was designed by AGRA

2.2.6 Sampling and Sample Size Determination

2.2.6.1 Location of the study The review was conducted in Tanzania. Based on the information gathered from literature review, locations of the grantees are concentrated in four main focal zones namely the Northern (i.e. Arusha, Kilimanjaro & Manyara), Southern highland (i.e. Mbeya, Iringa, and Rukwa) and Eastern (Dar es Salaam, Morogoro, Mtwara and Zanzibar). In this context, collection of data mainly focused onto these areas. 2.2.6.2 Sampling procedure Due to diversity of the locations, and the target population, purposeful, multistage and random sampling methods were employed in this study as outlined below

• Purposely three zones indicated above were selected for conducting this study. The choice was based on the fact that more than 90% of the beneficiaries/grantees were allocated in these zones. Thus it was envisaged plenty of data for generating required information would be gathered and almost all grantees could be visited if study (see Table 3). It is important to note that all seed companies and breeders which received funds were interviewed, hence no sampling was done.

Table 3: List of stakeholders interviewed by their locations

Zone Regions Checklists Questionnaire survey

Policy officials

Seed systems Breeders Seed Company

District villages farmers

Northern Arusha DALDO Meru

TOSCI Tengeru, Arusha seed farm, ASA Arusha, TASTA, CNFA Agro-dealers

Kuwite, Krishina Zenobia

Meru Mbuguni

44

Southern Mtwara DALDO Mkamilo Bagamoyo

Matibwa 41

Eastern Dar es Salaam

MAFSC, Seed unit 42

Zanzibar MAFSC Kizimbani Kizimbani Zanzibar Machui 43

Morogoro DALDO SUA Tanseed Internation

al

Kilosa Dumila 24

Southern Highlands

Mbeya TOSCI DALDO

CNFA Agro-dealers

Mongi, Lyimo

Tanseed Internation

al, Highland

seed, Uyole

Mbeya (Rural)

Iwindi&Mwampa

lala

18

Mbozi Mbimba 43

4 6 6 7 255

.

26

• Multistage sampling was then employed so as to narrow down to regions, districts, and villages where studies in each zones were conducted. For multistage approach, seed and other farm inputs value chain (e.g. basic seed, foundation, certified seed, and seed stockiest, farmers) guided the sampling processes.

• Stratified Random sampling was finally employed to select farmers for questionnaire survey. In each sample district, one village (except Mbeya with two villages) was chosen based on the recommendations from respective District Agricultural and Livestock Development Officers (DALDO). In each village two strata comprising low and high income strata were identified based on information from village office. From each strata a random sample of not more than 25 farmers were randomly selected. Hence farm level evaluation study was be conducted in 7 villages located in 6 districts and 4 regions. Sample size for questionnaire survey will comprise 360 stratified and randomly sampled farmers. Table 4 provides number of respondents interviewed by the locations where the study was conducted. Agro-dealer were randomly sampled in most cases within the village, within the district or nearby district where the questionnaire survey was conducted

Table 4: Sample size of the respondents (Farmers)

Zone Region District Villages Respondents Total Percent Male Female

North Arusha Arumeru Mbuguni 44 17.3

East Pwani Bagamoyo Matibwa 41 16.1

Morogoro Kilosa Dumila 42 16.5

Zanzibar Kati Machui 43 16.9

South Mbeya Mbeya Iwindi 24 9.4

Mwampalala 18 7.1

Mbozi Mbimba 43 16.7

Total 255 100

2.3 Field Work Coordination To enhance responsive high value and sustainable results in this assignment, participatory approaches were employed. This involved hand-holding, discussions, consultative meetings with project staff and other key stakeholders of this assignment. A pre-field visit and meeting was conducted between the project coordinator and technical staff before the commencement of the interviews to clarify the focus and direction of the evaluations. On the same premise, the team confirm on the expected results and deliverables of the evaluation. The recruitment of field staff was carried out on the basis of their competence and experience in similar engagements. Assessors were largely being selected from our fieldwork associates that are frequently involved in agricultural fieldwork surveys. The assessors was thereafter undergo a four days training on the use of evaluation tools for uniformity and common understanding. Field work followed after the training workshop (see Appendix 7.3).

27

2.3.1 The Evaluation Team and Working Protocol

The six-expert multidisciplinary team visited beneficiaries of the program and partner organizations (involved in 11 projects) in eight different regions (Morogoro, Mtwara, Unguja, Pwani, Arusha, Dar es Salaam and Mbeya) in Tanzania. The list of evaluation team is presented in Appendix 7.4 . The evaluation involved a quantitative analysis of selected indicators for the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the PASS projects for the improvement of food security, income and reduction of poverty. Three teams were involved. One team covered the Northern zone, one in the eastern zone and the third in the Southern zone

2.3.2 Data Analysis

About 255 dully filled questionnaires were coded, and entered in the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) computer programme. After data entry, data cleaning was conducted to remove outliers and relevant analyses according to objectives of the assignment were conducted. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted. Main methods included mean, frequencies, cross tabulations, range and chi-square where more validation was required.

2.3.3 Evaluation indicator for different sub-programmes

In any project evaluation assignment such as this definition of indicators from which reference can be made is important. Table 5 presents the summary of activities done by sub-programmes. In the subsequent columns output indicators and outcome indicators are presented. Data collection methodology and tools for data collection have been aligned to collect such information. Table 5: Logical Frame table: (Summary of PASS activities, indicators, and outcome indicators) EACI Activities Outputs and Indicators EACI

Outcomes Outcome Indicators

1. Identify infrastructure and capacity needs of Universities in East Southern and West Africa for PhD and MSc Training in Crop Breeding

2. Establish PhD and

MSc Fellowship Programmes in selected Universities

• Number of PhD Fellowship Programmes in crop breeding

• Number of MSc Fellowship Programmes in Crop Science

• Number of PhD Graduates

• Number of PhD students enrolled and still in progress

• Number of MSc graduates

• Number of MSc students enrolled and still in progress

• Number of publications from thesis research of PhD and MSc students

Improved capacity of African crop scientists to generate new locally adapted crop technologies

• Annual number of PhD graduates from AGRA supported programmes

• Annual number of MSc students from AGRA supported programs

• Number of publications in refereed by African crop Scientists from AGRA supported institutions

• Number of AGRA trained crop scientists active in crop breeding 3 years after graduation

FIACC Activities Outputs indicators FIAAC Outcomes

Outcome indicators and targets

1. Support to crop breeders for

• Number of improved varieties released

Increased adoption of

• Percentage of farmers aware of improved

28

development ( breeding testing promotion and release) of improved crop varieties and production of breeders seed

2. Provide support to national seed trade associations to help them lobby governments for favorable variety release policies

• Number of farmers participating in variety evaluation

• Breeders seed produced (MT)

• Number of demonstrations held on improved varieties

• Number of field days held on improved varieties

• Number of technical bulletins (brochures fliers posters) on improved varieties and distributed to farmers

locally adapted new varieties of staple food by smallholders

varieties

• Percentage of smallholder farmers using new crop varieties

• Average time from entry in National Performance trials (NPT) to variety release by cop

SEPA activities Output and indicator targets SEPA Outcomes

Outcome indicators and targets

1. Strengthen seed entities that satisfy basic criteria to enable them produce seed, stimulate demand, and educate farmers about the value of improved seed and to establish a network of agro dealers

2. Offer business development Services (BDS) to selected Seed Companies

3. Establish Seed Enterprise Institutes

4. Help employees from seed companies to be trained at seed enterprise institutes

5. Boost the production of foundation seed

6. Assist the multiplication of certified seed

7. Assist seed entities to establish demonstrations hold field days on improved varieties, exhibit at agricultural shows engage in radio programs and produce technical bulletins ( brochures, fliers, posters) on improved seed etc.

8. Increase the number of Agro dealers selling improved seed

9. Help seed companies to get licenses to produce publically owned varieties.

• Number of seed entities supported

• Number of seed companies receiving Business Development Services

• Number of Seed Enterprise Institutes established

• Number of seed company employees trained at seed Enterprise institutes

• Quantity of Foundation Seed produced (MT)

• Quantity of certified/commercial seed produced (MT)

• Number of demonstrations on improved seed

• Number of field days held to display improved seed

• Number of radio programmes aired on improved seed

• Number of technical bulletins (brochures, fliers, posters) on improved seed distributed to farmers

• Number of Agro dealers recruited to serve as seed sales outlets for improved seed

• Number of improved varieties licensed to private seed companies and other seed entities

An efficient seed industry that delivers high quality seed of improved crop varieties to Agro dealers and hence to smallholders

• Number of new partnerships established between public breeding institutions and private seed companies

• Time from NPT release to commercial availability of improved seed

• Annual volume of seed produced by AGRA supported seed companies

• Number of viable private seed companies two years after AGRA Support

ADP activities ADP outputs and indicators ADP Outcome indicators and

29

Outcomes targets 1. Train Agro dealers in

Business Management 2. Train Agro dealers in technical management 3. Expand number of

certified agro dealers selling improved seed

4. Negotiate MOUs between AGRA and Banks /microfinance institutions to provide loans to agro dealers

• Number of agro dealers trained in business management

• Number of agro dealers trained in technical management

• Number of Agro dealers certified

• Number of Agro dealers selling improved seed

• Quantity of improved seed sold by agro dealers

• Number of MOUs signed between AGRA and banks/microfinance institutions

• Number of agro dealers covered by input credit facilities

• Volume of commercial loans and input credit guarantees issued to agro dealers

Improved access to seed for improved crop varieties by smallholder farmers

• Number of certified agro dealers per 1000 farms

• 9000 certified agro dealers after 10 years

• Distance farmers travel to buy improved seed from agro dealers

30

3.0 RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION 3.1 Overall AGRA support in Tanzania Figure 1 present the amount (US$) and proportion of AGRA funds for different sub-component. Financial support to Agro Dealers Programme was the largest of the three, as accounted for 70% of funds supporting green revolution in Tanzania. SEPA was allocated US$ 1,050 (i.e. 13%) while FIAAC granted US$ 932,305 (i.e. 12%). The smallest per cent was target for the training programme (EACI) which accounted 5% only. Detailed projects funded under each sub-programmes indicated above and amount allocated are further elaborated in Table 6 below.

Figure 1: Proportion of funds for Tanzania grantee for different sub-programmes

EACI, $401,945 ,

5%

FIACC, $932,305 ,

12%

SEPA, $1,050,952

, 13%

ADP, $5,556,661 ,

70%

For the projects under review, FIAAC grantees received similar amount of funds (i.e. US$ 185,000) irrespective of the type of project activities proposed. Emerging seed companies received much less where the ADP (TASP) received the highest (Table 6). Table 6: List of PASS grantees in Tanzania between 2009 and 2009

EACI Grantees in Tanzania 2007 – 2009

Grant Number

Organization Name & Project Title Grant Amount

($)

Program Area

2007 PASS 052

Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) - 401,945 MSc Training in Plant Breeding & Related Fields

FIAAC Grantees in Tanzania 2007 -2009 2008 PASS 053

Dr C. Madata- ARI Uyole Mbeya Soybean variety development, adoption, and utilization

192,860 Improvement and adoption of African Crops

2007 PASS 009

Dr G. Mkamilo – ARI Naliendele Farmer Participatory Improvement of Cassava Germplasm for Farmer /Market Preferred Traits in Tanzania

185,000 Fund for the improvement and adoption of African Crops/Breeding

2007 PASS 005

Ms Rose Mongi- ARI Uyole Mbeya Addressing Rural Poverty, in the Southern Highlands

185,000 Improvement and adoption of African

31

of Tanzania through improvement of Angular Leaf Spot and Anthracnose Disease Resistance in Common Beans

crops/Breeding

2007 PASS 004

Dr N. Lyimo – ARI Uyole Mbeya Developing and disseminating improved maize varieties in Tanzania for food Security and improved Household Income

184,445 Improvement and adoption of African crops/Breeding

2007 PASS 003

Dr C. Kuwite – ARI Selian Arusha Towards improvement and adoption of African Crops. Development Production Testing Distribution and Promotion of Tanzanian Experimental hybrid maize

185,000 Improvement and adoption of African crops/Breeding

SEPA GRANTEES IN TANZANIA 2007 PASS 044

I. M. Mashauri-Tanseed International Ltd – Production and Dissemination of improved Seed of Maize, Pigeonpea, and sesame in Tanzania

168,843 Seed Production for Africa/ Private Seed Distribution

2007 PASS 008

Zenobia Seed Limited-Production and delivery of improved seed to poor small scale farmers in Tanzania

154,500 Seed Production for Africa/ Private Seed Distribution

2007 PASS 005

Krishna Seed Company Limited- Reducing Hunger and Poverty among Tanzanian small scale farmers through the use of improved seed.

151,000 Seed Production for Africa//Private Seed Distribution

2007 PASS 025

H H. Saleb – Ministry of Agriculture Livestock and Environment- Enhancing Farmers Initiatives for Multiplication and dissemination of Cassava virus tolerant Planting Materials in Zanzibar.

157,500 Seed Production for Africa/ Public Seed Distribution

ADP GRANTEES IN TANZANIA 2007 PASS 020

J. Scapone- CNFA TAGMAC – Tanzania Agro dealer strengthening Programme

4,310,616 Agro dealer Strengthening Program

2008 PASS 052

Dr M. Msolla –Preparation of the Tanzania Agricultural Inputs Access Framework

246,046 Agro dealer Strengthening Program

3.2 Projects Supported Under the Training Component (EACI)

3.2.1 MSc Training in Plant Breeding and Related Fields at SUA –Morogoro –(2007 PASS 052) Coordinated by Dr Cornel Rweyemamu

Introduction Prior PASS intervention the plant breeding aspects in Tanzania were mixed. According to Luzi-Kihupi and Lazaro (2007) report, the major part of agricultural research and training was undertaken by MAFC department of research and training (DRT), which is responsible for and co-ordinates all MAFC research and training as well as maintaining contacts with international research and training organization. DRT has a network of 22 major research stations and sub-stations in seven agro-ecological zones (Luzi-Kihupi and Lazaro., 2003) Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) under the Ministry of Science and Technology, continue to be responsible for higher agricultural education and basic and adaptive research as well as extension while there is limited basic research at the University of Dar-es Salaam (UDSM). The DRT Research system had a total number of 46 plant breeders. An addition 5 comes from the Universities (4 from SUA and 1 from the UDSM). Out of 46 from the DRT, 21 are MSc holders and 14 PhD holders. Out of these, 3 PhD and 2 MSc holders are Officer-in-Charges or Directors

32

of Institutes, one is the DRT at the Ministry Headquarters, while 2 are on leave without pay. At SUA, out of four plant breeders, one is on leave without pay and another one is working on contract after retiring. Unfortunately it was apparent that most of the senior breeders are now aged and were about to retire (within 4-6 years). Another problem faced the breeders was lack of incentive schemes to encourage local breeders to breed new varieties. These schemes may come as royalties for released varieties and or as promotion of staff. Main objective The Education for African Crop Improvement (EACI) would provide training for a new generation of crop breeders and agricultural scientists upon which the seed system depends for growth and productivity. The project aimed at increasing the number of agricultural scientists in the country who are trained at graduate level in crop sciences. Specific Objectives: (i) Train staff from the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security and other institutions at MSc.

level. To achieve this, scholarships and support for the training of up to 10 MSc. students within a period of 2 years was sought.

(ii) Improve the departmental infrastructure required for an effective teaching and research. In

this regard the department sought financial support to facilitate: a) Constructing one plastic greenhouse b) Equipping research laboratories and procurement of teaching aids

(iii) Conduct research geared towards alleviating biotic and abiotic stresses with special focus on major food and horticultural crops, in line with the students training.

Main outputs envisaged were; o The 10 students successfully complete research work, dissertation production by August

2010 and graduate in November 2010 o The teaching capacity in the Department of Crop Science and Production improved o At least one 300m2 plastic greenhouse constructed and used in teaching and research by

July 2009 o The research capacity in the Department of Crop Science and Production improved o Some appropriate technologies for improving adaptability of major food crops to biotic and

abiotic stresses are made known by August 2010 To ensure above outputs are met through advanced training at M.Sc. level students in Plant Breeding and related crop improvement fields SUA received grant amount to US$401,945 for a period of two years, 2009. The grant came at the right time for the country desperately needed breeders to replace the aging and retired scientists. Some crops such as sorghum had no breeders while other crops such as maize, wheat, and rice majority are about to retire. PASS support to provide scholarship for MSc (at SUA) and PhD (at UKN) came at a time when it was needed most. A list of AGRA sponsored students registered at SUA Tanzania is presented in Annex 6 Observation during the Mid Term Review (MTR)

• In-service training –Suggested for provision of the anticipated in- service training for plant breeders and others for training of technicians involved in seed multiplication in both public and private sectors as well as for the ARIs and district agriculture office staff who will supervise and authorize production of QDS.

• Small number of PhD beneficiaries compared to Kenya and Uganda,

33

• Masters degree training started two years later than intended because of delays in proposal approval and transfer of funds

• The appropriateness of M&E quarterly reporting schedule for training projects where the academic year is the basic time unit was questioned.

• Introduce more specialized training on seed technology (working at a Departmental level studying the stakeholders)

• Limited number of applicants for PhD was revealed however we urge PASS to present open announcements through local newspaper rather than relying on web page and local contacts

• Provide PhD training at Sokoine University of Agriculture to attract many local breeders to enroll especially those who are not interested to enroll outside the country

• Call for funding short term training for technical staff who provide the helping hands to MSc and PhD researchers

• Make the availability of grant open to would be the researchers. Our observation revealed that the recipients are more based on who know who particularly with previous links with either Programme officers or programmes such as Rockefeller foundation

• Liaison with Government particularly Department of Research and Training so that breeding programme do not deviate with National Research priorities

• Avail funds to recently retired breeders (who can work with young breeders) who are employed on contractual bases and task them to work on specific research problem on a specified time period. They have the required skills, experiences and time to concentrate in breeding work and accomplish the task on time.

• Department proposal to revise funding approach to avoid the stand alone project involving submitting a new proposal each year and adopt the continuous approach foe specified number of years

Terminal evaluation

• Nine (9) students are still continuing with studies at different stages of data collecting and dissertation writing (Refer Table 7).

• According to SUA guidelines, they are supposed to finish on 30th September 2011, however all student are slightly late thus their registration might be extended for three more months to December 2011. All students indicated the delay of research funds as the main reason. Other reason was a delay on the start of the rains especially for those were doing field experiments.

• Equipment’s, vehicles, laboratory equipment and screen house bought through AGRA support will continue to be used in the department for few years to come

• The support was very effective since it has added knowledge to young researchers who upon completion they shall be more knowledgeable about their subject. Also since majority are employed by government institutions or local authorities, the multiplier effect to their community will be very high

• Student recorded dissatisfaction on delays on receiving their stipend and research funds. The problem was very severe in project year 2 that year 1. This problem has led to failure in finishing their studies timely.

• Students proposed to have Exchange programme with other universities to share experiences

34

Table 7: List of AGRA sponsored students registered at Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA), Tanzania Name Sex Affiliation Sponsor Crop Thesis Title A Magelanga F Tanzania AGRA Beans Effect of P level on growth and Yield

components of drought bean lines in southern highlands of Tanzania

A.I. Meya M Tanzania AGRA Tomato Yield Efficacy of selected varieties and fungicides at different regimes on control of tomato late blight

A. Baltazari F Tanzania AGRA Beans Bean Density suppression on weeds in maize bean intercropping under conventional and conservation tillage systems

C. Mwape M Zambia AGRA? na na

J. Lobulu M Tabora Tanzania

AGRA Rice Characterization of rice germplasm for cold tolerance through field evaluation and participatory selection in the southern Highlands

J. Hubert F Tanzania AGRA Rice Efficacy of selected plant extracts against Pyriculariagriceacausal agent of rice blast

J.Matonya M Tanzania AGRA Maize Influence of Genotype x Environment interaction on performance of selected maize (Zea mays) hybrids in Southern Tanzania

M. Francis F Tanzania AGRA Beans Fungicidal control of Angular leaf spots in common beans

M. A. Patrick M Malawi AGRA Note: He absconded studies soon after admission.

R.Majubwa M Tanzania AGRA Egg plant

The effect of harvesting stage on quality and shelf life of African Eggplant(Solanumaethiopicum) fruits

NA – During review mission the candidate was in Zambia doing field work thus information could not be established

According to Dr. Kashenge a beneficiary of the PASS programme (PhD)the fact that the ACCI Program draws students from different African countries provides for multi-country experience sharing, greater linkage and collaboration. The major outcome of her training is the development and acceptance of a new PASS Project proposal to evaluate and release salt tolerant rice varieties developed during her PhD Program.

3.3 Projects Supported Under the Breeding Subprogram (FIAAC) Under this FIAAC, AGRA offered grant to three projects. The projects are; a) Developing and disseminating improved maize varieties in Tanzania for food security and

improved household income – (2007 PASS 004:) coordinated Dr Catherine Kuwite b) Towards improvement of African Crops: Production Testing Promotion and distribution of

hybrid maize cultivars in the high and intermediate altitude zones of Tanzania – (PASS 003 OF 2007) coordinated by Dr. N. G. Lyimo

c) Addressing rural poverty in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania through improvement of Angular Leaf Spot and Anthracnose diseases resistance in common bean (Phaseolusvulgaris) – (PASS 005 OF 2007:) coordinated by Ms Rose Mongi, and

35

d) Farmer participatory improvement of cassava germplasm for farmer market/market preferred traits in Tanzania- (2007 PASS 009)- Dr Godfrey Mkamillo

Analyses of the review team is presented in section 3.2.1 to 3.2.4 below

3.3.1 Developing and Disseminating Improved Maize Varieties in Tanzania for Food Security and Improved Household Income – (2007 PASS 004) by Dr. C. Kuwite

General information

This project is implemented in the Northern zone of Tanzania with the goal to “increase household food security and income to farmers in the intermediate and low altitudes of Tanzania. The objective of the project was to develop and release high yielding maize varieties resistant to Northern leaf blight, grey leaf spot, maize streak and common rust diseases. Activities carried out to achieve this objective were: a) Breeding related activities (sourcing new germplasm and evaluation goals) b) Hybridization (crosses at different stages) c) Variety development and selection d) Variety description and Distinction, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) testing for official

release formalities e) Breeder seed production f) Linkage with seed companies and other seed stakeholders, and g) Variety promotion and dissemination The realized (actual outputs) of this project were:- a) Two maize hybrid varieties – (Selian H208 and Selian 308) were released for commercial

production in 2010. b) Two more varieties (SARI HO6A7 and SARI HO6A24) were in National Performance Trials

(NPT) and Durability, University and Stability (DUS) hence are advanced stages for release c) Five more entries were in the advanced stages of testing on-farm and will be proposed to

TOSCI for NPT and DUS tests during the next growing season.. If breeder seeds of the released varieties are produced and adopted in a wider scale, they will contribute to the situation of self-sufficiency and income generation to most households. Suitability measurements

A: Relevance of the project goal: The project outputs were intended to contribute to the increased household food security and income to farmers. According to the interview made with the Principal Investigator (Dr. Catherine Kuwite) and review of various project reports, the goal was relevant as it was strongly correlating to the AGRA’s main goal of reducing food security by 50% and double income of beneficiaries (participating farmers). The reasons given to support this were:

i. Disease being addressed (blight, streak and gray leaf spot) are of high economic importance in the Northern zone.

ii. Varieties released are resistant to diseases and high yielding iii. New varieties and seed were derived and developed from local materials and conditions iv. Farmers show great interest and acceptance of characteristics (yield, resistance to

diseases, maturity) of the released varieties.

36

B: Effectiveness of project activities The project objective was achieved too as two (2) varieties; Selian H208 and Selian H 308, were officially released (Table 8) and one (SARI Ho 6A7) is in the final stages of approval for release. However the breeder pointed out that formal release procedures need to be eased to expedite the release and use of breeding modern tools (e.g. molecular markers) to fasten the process. Table 8: Characteristics of released Maize varieties

Name Special Characteristics Breeder seed produced (Kg)

Yield (Kg/ha)

Selian H208 Resistant to diseases, & High yielding

200 8.1

Selian H 308 High yielding & Resistant to diseases

210 8.5

Some of the breeder seed produced was sent to Krishna and Zenobia seed companies for further multiplication. About 350 farmers participated in the process of developing these varieties through on-farm trial management and assessing the entries’ characteristics. It was noted that use of other media (TV, Radio, and Newspapers), frequent visits to the Institute and networking with other projects (e.g. SIMULESA) would strengthen stakeholder participation. As noted earlier, the project outputs were achieved to a large extent with increased interrelationship with other stakeholders. Some breeder seed of the 2 released varieties were distributed to ASA and few seed companies (IFA seed, Zenobia and Krishna) for further multiplication. However, the large quantity production and dissemination process is hampered by lack of irrigation facilities and low capacity of ASA to produce foundation seed. C: Efficiency of the project strategies. The set of activities intended to increase SARIs capacity to develop new hybrids, establishment of preliminary and advanced yield and submission of suitable lines for official release formalities (DUS and NPT tests were implemented accordingly using the allocated resources. There was also a strong involvement of international institutions (e.g. CIMMYT, IITA, and KARI) in securing suitable maize germplasms. The budget allocated was spent according to the set budget items (communication, evaluation, travel, purchase of equipment and field materials, Conferences and meetings) The project implementers produced annual financial reports which were internally audited and approved.

D. Project Effectiveness Implemented activities resulted into the release of two hybrid maize varieties (Selian (H203) and Selian 308) while two more lines (SARI 06A7 and SARI 0624) were at the NPT and DUS Tests for final release procedures. The Hybrids have higher yields (above 8 tons /ha)as compared to currently used open pollinated varieties whose potential yield is 3-4 tons/ha. In the long run it is anticipated that the project outputs for all breeding projects (networking, germplasm materials, farmer participation, and release of improved varieties such as maize hybrids will benefit the research system (NARS) at different levels. The benefits include availability of a wide range of germplasm for genetic improvement; increase the capacity skills of breeders, and availability of seeds. The benefits reported by the various breeders are summarized in Table 9.

37

Table 9: Observed and anticipated benefits from project activities

Stakeholder Observed/anticipated benefits Department of Research (DRD)

- Build and strengthen relationship with international organizations - Widening the scope (genetic base) available germplasm - Additional entries in nation variety catalogue

Research Institute

- Capacity to solve area specific production constraints (biotic, abiotic stresses)

- Royalty from the released varieties. - Availability of germplasm for a long term breeding activities. - Developing of research Scientists skills. - Additional research facilities (transport, computers). - Capacity to produce breeder seeds - Linkage and networking

Small – holder farmer

- Access to improved varieties. - Increased production and income (varieties released are high yield and

resistant to diseases). - Knowledge and skills (results of trainings and participation in the research

process)

Other Breeders - Availability of germplasm for exchange. - Knowledge and skills - Linkage with others

Seed Companies - Able to get breeder seeds of new varieties. - Increased demand of new varieties

E: Timelines of implementation of project activities. All the planned activities were implemented accordingly. There was a no cost extension of project period September 2010 as the crop was still in the field at the time of formal end of project (30th June 2010). F: Project financing: The project approved budget was 184,444 US $ and was used as per planned activities. Towards the end of project (30th June 2010), there was a balance of 7,889 $ which was approved for use during a no-cost extension period to enable completion of the field activities remaining. The budget approval procedures take longer period. It was suggested that funds should be disbursed timely and allow flexibility to cope with the cropping season. G: Project outcome: Outcome of the project is expected to be the improved food production and reduced costs of production through utilization of the varieties released that are resistant to common disease. (Maize streak, blight, grey leaf spot) and higher yields (above 8 t/ha). This outcome is forthcoming. Similarly, the collected and crossed lines will provide a wide genetic base for the breeding program. Materials used for breeding were obtained from the following sources:

• National maize Research Program (NMRP) 50 landraces and 5 lines

• CIMMYT (Nairobi) 30 OPVs

• CIMMYT (Harare) 90 inbred Lines, (first batch) 14 targeted at lower and dry mid altitude, wet and dry lowlands, and drought tolerance

38

• CIMMYT (Ethiopia) 20 inbred lines (targeted at highlands and upper mid altitudes, resistance to ET, PS, and GLS)

• IITA 21 inbred lines, 14 targeted at lower and dry mid altitude, wet and dry lowlands and drought tolerance.)

• KARI (Dr Gethi) 38 varieties targeted at drought tolerance and disease resistance

• ACCI 24 inbred lines targeted at drought tolerance and disease resistance. H: Project sustainability: Sustainable linkage components included strong involvement of farmers in variety development, linkage and collaboration with other seed system stakeholders (seed companies, ASA, and farmer groups). The challenging risk encountered is that the process of hybrid variety development requires special breeding skills and is resource intensive. Measures that are put in place to ensure the research department continues to breed more improved varieties after AGRA support are that:- � The breeders are trained and have skills on various aspects of hybridization. They can run the

breeding programs more efficiently and effectively. � Improved irrigation facilities in selected institution experimental fields so as to reduce the

time required in the breeding cycle (lines cab can be evaluated twice or thrice in one growing season).

� Local seed companies are involved in variety development; hence they can ensure availability of certified seeds to farmers.

� Government has shown some financial commitment to research. It has started contributing funds through COSTECH to reach its target of using 1% of its GDP in few years to come.

From the breeder’s point of view (Dr. C. Kuwite) the project included measures to protect natural environment as the developed hybrid varieties had retrogressed genes for resistance to diseases, thus do not require application of chemicals that may be hazardous to the environment. Similarly, germplasm materials used in variety development were also locally developed, hence its easiness for adoption.

3.3.2: Towards improvement of African Crops: Production Testing Promotion and distribution of hybrid maize cultivars in the high and intermediate altitude zones of Tanzania – (PASS 003 OF 2007) Dr. N. G. Lyimo

General information The project area covers the Southern Highlands of Tanzania and is implemented by Uyole Agricultural Research Institute (ARI) under the Coordination of Dr. N.G. Lyimo (now retired from Civil Service). The interview was carried out with Dr. Anold Mushongi who is now leading maize research in the institute and was also part of project implementation team. The project goal was to improve food security through access of improved maize cultivars and efficient seed system. The goal is relevant to AGRA’s effort to improved food security and income levels. The project objectives were to:-

• Evaluate new improved maize hybrids for high and intermediate altitudes of Tanzania.

• Evaluate maize hybrids with grain yield and adaptation potentials across the target area.

• Initiate sustainable breeder seed system

• Collaborate with TOSCI and seed companies in evaluation of new hybrids.

39

Activities implemented included:

• Cross between suitable parents for hybrid development

• Conduct maize hybrid evaluation trials

• Submission of best crosses to TOSCI for NPT and DUS testing prior to official release

• Production of breeder seeds.

Suitability measurements Major achievements of the project were to release 2 maize hybrids (UHS 5350 and UHS 5210). Very little was achieved in terms of breeder seed production. A: Project goal relevance According to the evaluator, the project goal was relevant as it addresses maize productivity as a function contributing to food and income earnings at the household levels. Maize is the most preferred staple in Tanzania and a source of income to more than 60% of smallholder farmers residing in rural areas. This as well confers strongly to the AGRA’s goal for the following reasons:-

• Maize hybrid varieties developed are high yielding (for food and income)

• Maize is the most important crop in Southern Highlands cultivated by more than 98% of the residents

• Farmers’ participation and training increased their knowledge on good agriculture practices. B: Effectiveness of project activities The objectives set to develop new varieties and high yielding cultivars was successfully met as the two hybrids (UHS 5350 and UHS 5210) with high yielding potential (8 - 10 t/ha) were released. However, breeder seed production and linkage with other seed system stakeholders were not adequately met. It was noted from the interview that ARI Uyole submitted a maize breeding proposal to AGRA and has been approved (Dr Mushongi is the PI). This project will concentrate more in the accomplishment of the process of developing maize hybrid variety and breeders seed production. Developed hybrids will be for the Southern Highlands Zone climatic environments The procedures for breeding were effectively delivered, but it seemed that the project period of 3 years and the complexity of development of hybrid maize (for open pollinated crop) possess some limitations. The financial resources support obtained from AGRA helped to ease the variety release process significantly. It enabled researchers to establish evaluation sites in different locations and involve a good number of farmers and other stakeholders in the evaluation process. About 420 farmers participated in the on farm evaluation process. Challenges faced were little capacity and support from Agriculture Seed Agency (ASA) in multiplying foundation seed and emerging new stresses (e.g. drought). C: Efficiency of project strategies Development of maize hybrids for the Southern Highlands zone was intended to produce maize hybrids that are high yielding and resistant to gray leaf spot disease. Activities to attain this objective were implemented to a large extent. These included the establishment of a breeding strategy (collection and crossing of potential germplasm) evaluation of offspring and selection of superior lines and submission of the suitable candidate lines for official release formalities. These were implemented according to the work plan with a budget allocation of USD 185,000.0

40

D: Timeliness of implementation All planned activities were implemented as planned. Some activities such as those related to linkages and seed production need to be streamlined beyond after the end of project period. Possibility is there for addressing some issues in the new approved project. E: Project financing Up to the end of project period, all the budgeted funds (185,000 US$) were disbursed and spent accordingly. The financial statements for all funds disbursed were available with a total expenditure of 180,697 US$ (98%). Government indirect costs included scientist salaries, research equipment, land, and office space. F: Project outcomes and benefits All the physical outputs expected from the breeder were achieved. These included collection of germplasm, crosses of suitable parents for biotic and abiotic stresses resistance, identification of suitable candidates for NPT and DUS testing proposition and ultimately the release of two maize hybrids. The breeder seed multiplication is expected to be further developed in the newly approved grant. G: Project sustainability Aspects of project sustainability beyond AGRA financial support include: i) Selection of breeding lines for crosses using the local population/landraces (for good

adaptation and local availability). ii) Initiation of a new project (already approved) that will build on the outputs of this

project. iii) Government commitment to funding research has slightly increased. The government has

committed itself to spending about 1% of its GDP on research. Currently over 100 research proposals are been evaluated for funding by the government under the Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH). Students are also currently being trained at the MSC and PhD level at SUA and abroad supported by the Government through COSTECH

iv) Qualities of released varieties were assessed and accepted by farmers in the target area. This increases the likelihood of adoption.

3.3.3 Addressing rural poverty in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania through improvement of Angular Leaf Spot and Anthracnose diseases resistance in common bean (Phaseolus Vulgaris) – (PASS 005 OF 2007) by Ms. Rose Mongi

General information The project is coordinated by Uyole Agricultural Research Institute in the Southern Highland Zone under the coordination of Ms. Rose Mongi. The project contributed to the goal of reducing rural poverty by improving food security and income levels through development of common bean varieties that are resistant to foliar diseases and end user acceptable qualities. Main achievements were: a) Development of 11 advanced lines with resistance to foliar diseases. These materials are now

being evaluated on farm at different locations. b) Initiation of linkage with seed companies and other seed system stakeholders through

inception workshop and field visits. c) Training of 200 farmers and 8 agricultural extension staff on bean foliar disease management,

and d) Submission of the best 5 lines to TOSCI for DUS and NPT release formalities.

41

Project suitability measures

A: Relevance of project goal The project addresses two important bean diseases hampering production of bean crop which is an important food and cash crop in the Southern Highlands. The goal is similar to that of AGRA as they both address issues of food security and income at household levels. Reasons given to support this overall goal were: i) Varieties developed and proposed for release are high yielding (contributes to food

security and cash income) ii) Varieties were developed using the “local landraces”, hence well adapted to the local

environment (adaptation and can perform better in the local conditions) iii) Angular Leaf Spot and Anthracnose diseases are common and devastating in bean

production.

B: Effectiveness of project strategies The project achieved its two objectives to introgression of resistant gene and capacity building for farmers and extension staff very well. However, the remaining two (release of new varieties and strengthening of linkage with seed companies) were achieved to some extent. Bean breeding program started from very initial stages of crossing. The project period of three years was not sufficient to complete all procedures and stages involved in official variety release formalities. Linkage with other stakeholders in the seed system was not fully developed because seed companies show little interest in production of bean (and other pulses) seeds on commercial basis. Five advanced lines of beans were submitted to TOSCI for NPT and DUS tests. However, after two years of evaluation, TOSCI recommended that the lines be evaluated on farm for one more season. These varieties have yield range of 3 – 3.5 t/ha. Total of 350 farmers were involved in the evaluation process while 1,410 farmers participated in agricultural shows and demonstrations. Thus the achievement could have been enhanced by putting more emphasis on the promotion and networking strategies as well as using germplasm developed by other projects.

C: Efficiency of the project strategies The bean breeding objective was to introgression resistant genes into susceptible cultivars against anthracnose and angular leaf spot diseases. Others were to train farmers and extension workers on bean seed borne diseases and appropriate crop husbandry practices. Activities set to achieve these objectives were implemented as planned without exceeding the budget set. They included the development and implementation of a breeding protocol initiation of linkage with other stakeholders (ASA, Seed Companies and farmer groups) and provide training to farmers and extension staff on good bean husbandry practices and strategies to combat bean diseases. Major items of the budget lines were travel expenses to project sites, procurement of project facilities (vehicle, computers, laboratory and field supplies personnel and publications. Both quarterly and annual physical and financial progress reports were evident to the efficient implementation of the project.

All the planned activities were implemented; though there was a no-cost project extension period to allow completion of the cropping cycle. There was a close internal and external financial monitoring and reporting system. The Project was implemented for three years with a total budget of 185,000 US$.

42

F: Project outcomes Resources from AGRA have enabled ARI Uyole to re-establish its bean breeding program for abiotic stresses. Similarly, the disease stress genes retrogressed into the bean germplasm in SHZ will be very resourceful in the future breeding activities especially in improvement of local landraces. Imparted knowledge to scientists, extension staff and farmers will make them more effective in their undertaking hence becoming more productive. Linkages with seed companies are initiated, but it needs further improvement, to contribute to more functional bean value chain. G: Project sustainability Implementation of project activities considered sustainability aspects such as using the locally available bean landraces, empowering scientists through training, farmer participation and establishment of linkage with its seed system partners (DALDO staff, seed companies and farmer groups). Some of the challenges encountered were weather fluctuations (frequent droughts), lengthy and demanding variety release procedures and emerging new diseases such as bean rust in late generations. A follow up proposal to address the existing challenges has been developed. It is anticipated that farmers will use the developed outputs because of the following reasons:

• Farmers were fully involved in the variety development process

• Crosses were made using bean local landraces parents

• Bean is gaining importance as cash and food crop in SHZ and neighboring countries (Malawi and Zambia)

• Resistance to important diseases (leaf spot and anthracnose) has been identified and retrogressed in the developed varieties.

3.3.4: Farmer participatory improvement of cassava germplasm for farmer

market/market preferred traits in Tanzania- (2007 PASS 009)-Dr. G. Mkamillo

General information This project is intended to develop improved cassava varieties in various cassava growing areas of Tanzania. The initiative of the project is quite consistent with the goal to contribute to improved livelihood and household food security of rural communities in the cassava producing regions of Tanzania. This goal is very relevant to AGRAs efforts to improve food security and income levels of smallholder farmers. The objectives of the project include development of improved varieties, capacity building of research scientists and strengthening of linkages with other stakeholders.

Effectiveness of Project strategies The project has led to the release of 8 improved cassava varieties (Mkombozi, Kyaka, Nyakafulo, Belinde, Meremeta, Rangimbili, Kasala and Suma). The attributes of the new varieties include high yields, resistance to cassava mosaic disease (CBSD), and tolerance to cassava green mite, high dry matter yield and early maturity. All the released varieties have an average yield ranging from 17-22 t/ha. The average quantity of breeders seed produced is estimated as 1 acre and the quantity of breeders seed sold is estimated to be 10,000 cuttings for each variety. The seed was sold to farmers, Irente Seed Co, CRS, and Local Government Authorities for multiplication and distribution. Four lines are also being subjected to NPTs tests under TOSCI. One scientist has been trained to the level of PhD. Linkages have been established with the District councils, NGOs and the Private sector.

43

About 500 farmers are estimated to have participated in process of variety development. For the field days and farmer assessment of the varieties about 1200 farmers were involved (720 men and 480 women). Other areas that farmers were involved to promote adoption of the varieties include exchange visits, study tours, seed fares, and Agricultural shows.

The project duration of three years as well as financial resources was not sufficient to complete all the formalities involved in official variety release. Unlike crops such as maize, the cassava crop takes longer time in the field to complete the breeding process. For the Eastern zone for example the project duration elapsed when the materials were at the NPT stage. And due to drought stress (limited disease pressure) the NPT tests had to be conducted for one additional year. For the 8 released varieties the materials were at an advanced stage through an earlier Rockefeller Foundation Project and AGRA grant facilitated the final stages of the NPT tests. Project suitability measures

A: Efficiency of Project Strategies The total project budget support from AGRA was US$ 185,000=. The breakdown of the budget was not based on the format presented for the evaluation. As a result it was difficult to desegregate the financial costs by the given items. Direct financial costs incurred by the department include staff salaries, electricity and water bills while non-monetary costs include office space, land, office facilities, and laboratory and field equipment. It was felt that the project outputs and the associated benefits merit the direct and indirect project costs because they created conducive environment for implementing the project. Most of the planned activities were implemented accordingly. However, there was a no cost extension of project period since the crop was still in the field at the time of formal end of project. (30th June 2010).

The NPTs for the 4 potential lines were conducted out of the timeframe approved for the project because of the nature of the cassava crop. As a result the project ended before the NPTs were harvested. A no cost extension was requested and approved by AGRA.

B: Project Financing The total project budget support from AGRA was US$ 185,000= However the actual total cost was US$ 235,000=. As indicated earlier the approved AGRA budget was not adequate to cover the costs involved in the project. Four potential lines had to be planted for one additional year to subject them to a high disease pressure before release as an NPT requirement. The budget overrun was covered through other sources. C: Project Outcome Resources from AGRA have enabled the cassava Program to develop high yield cassava varieties that are resistant and tolerant to major cassava disease resulting in higher income for smallholder farmers. The disease stress genes incorporated in the released varieties will be very resourceful in the future breeding activities especially in improvement of local landraces. The project has also imparted knowledge to scientists, extension staff and farmers making them more productive. Linkages with seed companies were established to enhance multiplication and distribution of improved planting materials. D: Project Sustainability Most of the project activities took into consideration sustainability aspects such as empowering scientists through training, farmer participation and establishment of linkage with its seed system partners (LGAs staff, seed companies and farmer groups). No agrochemicals were applied to the

44

crop in the field. Drought stress was the major risk encountered during the implementation of the project, and this was mitigated by repeating the NPTs in one more season. The project has trained one scientist at the PhD level to ensure sustainability of the breeding program. It is anticipated that farmers will use the developed outputs because of the following reasons: Farmers were fully involved in the variety development process. Cassava is also gaining importance as cash and food crop in Tanzania. Resistance to important diseases such as CBSD has been identified and incorporated in the developed varieties. The varieties have other desirable characteristics such as drought tolerance, higher yields which are important for increased income and food security for the smallholder farmers. 3.4 Projects Supported under the Seed Production Subprogram (SEPA)

3.4.1 Introduction

Production and processing of bulk of certified seed is done to cater for country’s annual seed demand. In Tanzania most of seed companies produce certified seed through contract growers and government seed farms. Seed Companies process and package the seed for distribution (personal communication, Seed farms and seed Companies). There are essentially three categories of seed producers in Tanzania.

• Producers of locally sourced seeds. Included in this category are (a) foundation seed farms that are currently under Agricultural Seed Associations (ASA). These farms produce basic seed of various crops, which are purchased by private seed companies to produce certified seed. These farms also produce and market certified seed of OPV maize and other crops that are not produced by private seed companies. (b) Highland Seed Growers Ltd. is a private seed company which produces locally bred hybrid maize.

• Those that sell imported seed and also produce locally sourced seed: Another group of seed producers comprise of regional seed companies that market imported vegetable and hybrid maize seed. These companies which include East African Seed T) Ltd and Suba Agro Trading and Engineering Co., also produce locally bred OPV maize and seeds of other crops, and

• Those that only import certified seed from abroad: These categories include foreign companies such as SeedCo., FICA, Kenya Seed, Pioneer and Pannar. These companies import certifies seed from outside. The normal procedure is that they bring in elite varieties to be tested in Tanzania and follow the normal release procedure. Then after the variety is released in Tanzania, they obtain import permit to import certified seed of the same variety to be sold within the country.

Supporting seed companies to enable produce seed for farmers was one of the pillars of PASS. The seed companies that received support from PASS were Zenobia Seed Ltd and Krishna Seed Company Ltd, both based in Arusha with their field activities concentrated in Manyara region. Another seed company along the same line was Tanseed International with activities based in Morogoro (Table 10). Table 10: PASS Grants for seed companies and their locations

Grant Number

Project Title Location in Tanzania

Type of Enterprise

2008 PASS 008

Zenobia Seeds Limited:- Production and delivery of improved seed to poor small-scale farmers in Tanzania

Northern zone

Private seed Co.

45

2008 PASS 005

Krishna Seed Company Limited:- Reducing hunger and poverty among Tanzanian small-scale farmers through use of improved seed

Northern zone

Private seed Co.

2007 PASS 044

Tanseed International Ltd:- Production and dissemination of improved seed of maize, pigeon pea and sesame in Tanzania

Eastern zone Private seed Co.

2007 PASS 025

Division of Research and Training, Ministry of

Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives: Enhancing farmers' initiatives for multiplication and dissemination of cassava virus tolerant planting materials in Zanzibar

Zanzibar Public Institution

*2009 PASS 022

Meru Agro-Tours and Consultants Co. Ltd.:- Production, promotion and distribution of selected improved seed varieties at affordable price to small-scale farmers in Northern Tanzania

Northern zone

Private seed Co.

*2009 PASS 012

Itente Company Limited:- Seed Production and Dissemination by Itente Company in the value chain approach and options for up-scaling crop productivity in Kagera region of Tanzania

Lake zone Private seed Co.

* Not evaluated by our team

3.4.2 KRISHNA SEED COMPANY Reducing Hunger and Poverty among Tanzanian small scale farmers through the use of improved seed (2008 PASS 005).

Krishna Seed is a company based in Arusha with all its activities being carried out in Babati – Magugu (200 km from Arusha) in a farm of about 2,500 hectares. The farm has some facilities such as drying yard, farm machinery and an office. The company produces over 700 tons of improved seeds in normal years. Most of seeds produced are of open pollinated crops. Discussion was held with the Project Director – Mr. Rajesh Karaganda. The main activities implemented are to increase seed production of improved varieties, farmers’ awareness creation, improve seed dissemination and delivery systems and initiation of regular monitoring schemes. Krishna Seeds Company produced 754ton of maize, 167ton of Sorghum, 182ton of lablab, 20ton of sunflower and 76ton of pigeon pea. TOSCI personnel inspected the seed farms 3 to 4 times a year, and they charge TSh. 25/kg of the certified seed produced to cover the costs of their services. The set target for maize was 850 tons that could cater for 22,000 extra small scale farmers The two companies could not manage to get the AGRA loan facility (ASIF and WAAIF) though they tried to apply for it.

3.4.3 ZENOBIA SEED Ltd: Production and delivery of improved seed to poor small scale farmers in Tanzania (2008 PASS 008)-

Zenobia Seeds Ltd is an agro-seed company specialized in farming and marketing of agricultural products. The company was registered in 1999 and started seed production in 2000. The interview was made with the Company Director – Rajinder Singh Mand

46

The main activities implemented by Zenobia Seed Ltd are to increase seed production of improved varieties, farmers’ awareness creation, improve seed dissemination and delivery systems and initiation of regular monitoring schemes. The Zenobia Company seed production was close to the proposed tonnage in the first year, though in the second year was strongly affected by drought. They produced 500t of maize, 400t of sorghum, and 30t of pigeonpea. Availability of foundation seeds were in big shortage. Before getting the grant Zenobia Seed Company had been producing only 550 MT per Annum but had targeted to raise the volume by adding on 950 additional tons of seed to cater for 38,000 farmers who are expected to plant at least 1 ha at a seed rate of 25 kg/ha. Zenobia Seed Company has established 4 demonstration sites where about 120 farmers were annually reached and educated on good practices for growing improved seeds. The company printed 15,000 copies of brochures and distributed them to stakeholders. Krishna Seed established 3 demonstration fields involving 110 farmers. At the moment, Zenobia Seed Company does not directly involve agro-dealers in selling the produced seeds. They have their own marketing outlets. In contrast Krishna Seed involves some 12 agro dealers who purchase about 50% of the seed produced by the company. Main challenges faced are drought stress and cash flow. Zenobia is now investing in irrigation facility through the loan obtained from Tanzania Investment Bank (TIB). The seed is packed and sold in 2kg, 5kg and 10kg packs. The two companies (Krishna and Zenobia) sold all the seed produced and that the amount produced did not suffice the demand. (a) Project implementation The companies achieved their objectives of increasing seed production (on average 550t to 1200t a year). The seed they produce are of crop varieties produced by other institutions (i.e., they don’t have their own bred varieties). The source of foundation seed is ASA, Selian Research Institute SARI and ICRISAT. Major types of produced seed include maize, sunflower, paddy, pigeon pea, lablab and beans. (b) Production of certified seeds Common crop and the varieties produced are: - Maize: (var. Kilima, Kito, Stuka, TMV1 and Lishe 1), Beans: (var. Lyamungu 85”, Lyamungu 90’, Selian kidney), Sunflower: (Var. Record), Rice (Var. Mguga, SARO, Super), Sesame: (var. from ICRISAT), Wheat: (var. Mali from Selian). Zenobia has 25 permanent staff and about 300 casual laborers who are employed during the peak of farming activities. Krishna employs 10 permanent technical personnel with a varying number of casual laborers employed for field operations depending on the season requirements. The companies are assured of getting an average of only 3 tons each of breeder and certified seed from ASA, the amount which is not enough to produce their targeted certified seeds. Seeds are produced mainly for low and intermediate altitudes. According to the company Directors, the time required in the process of development and release of new varieties is too long. This creates a serious shortage of breeder and subsequently, foundation seeds of the newly released varieties. On average, it takes 8 – 10 years to develop and release a variety. After release, it may take again 3 – 4 more years before getting a substantial amount of breeder and foundation seed.

47

(c) Seed sales and marketing arrangements with buyers Both companies produce the certified seeds from own farm. The breeder and foundation seeds come from ASA, ARIs or other International Research Centers like ICRISAT and CIAT. Main licensing arrangements with the suppliers are formal request letters, E-mails or non-exclusive licensing arrangements. In the last 12 months, Zenobia Seed Company produced about 950 tons of certified seed while Krishna produced 771 tons of improved seed. However, drought seriously affected the production during the 2010/2011 season. Crops involved in the seed production were maize, sunflower, paddy, pigeon peas, beans, lintel, yellow grain and sorghum. January and February are the periods when seeds are sold in the largest volumes while June and July are the months of smallest volume sales. Main buyers of certified seeds are large and small-scale farmers, and agro-dealers. To a lesser extent, there are special buying requests by the government through FAO seed relief program. Biggest buyers are in regional towns like Arusha, Manyara, Singida and Moshi about 150 – 200 km from the farm. Selling prices of improved seeds ranged from 900 Tshs/kg to 1,600 Tshs/kg. The companies compare their prices with other competitors by conducting mini surveys of seed markets /agro-dealer shops, agricultural shows trade fairs and field days. This is also related to the costs of production. There is very little variation in price between the times of largest and lowest volume sales. Zenobia Company has two shops – one in Babati and another in Simanjiro. In other places, seed is sold through agents. If buying a substantial amount of seeds, agents can have a special business arrangement of getting subsidized transport, credit or price discount. Sometimes there is a problem of delayed repayments of loans from the agents. (d) Participation in the Seed Subsidy Schemes The two companies were not involved in the scheme. (e) Market Information Information about the seed production chain and seed requirements is mainly obtained through field days, requests through telephones, demonstration plots, radio programs and agriculture extension workers. There is no special marketing information point. (f) Training Some of the company staff has under gone training related to seed business. The types of trainings got were on seed handling and usage. The training was provided by NGO (CNFA) is said to have increased management staff capacity and advice to buyers. (g) Access to credit Krishna Seed Company could not manage to get any loan. The director of the company complained of the process taking too long, too demanding requiring a lot of loan safety securities. He also did not bother to provide required details of the company potentials. Zenobia Company on the other hand, managed to secure a loan from Tanzania Investment Bank (TIB) amounting Tsh. 800 million. The loan repayment period is 5 years with an interest of 5%. The Company appreciates that it can pay back the loan and the loan will be very useful in expanding the seed business. The initial investment to start the business was Tsh. 1 billion. (h) Insurances and membership to associations Both companies are insured for fire and theft and they are members of Tanzania Seed Grower Association (TASTA).

48

(i) Pricing of goods The pricing mechanism involves comparisons of production costs, profit margin required and prices of products from other companies. Table 11: Constraints facing Zenobia seed, their Effect and strategies to overcome them

Constraints Their effect Strategies to control them

Zenobia seed company 1.0 Insufficient trained manpower

=>Field Operations and seed grading taking too long =>Supervision of field work and quality control is insufficient

-Recruit new graduates on permanent basis -Employment of laborers during peak periods of the season

2.0 Limited cash flow for further investment

Inability to make further investment in farm machinery and expansion of farmland

-The company managed to secure an 800 million TZs Loan from TIB -Using earnings from other partner business (Dodoma transport)

3.0 Lack of crop insurance against natural catastrophes such as drought

Great losses during the dry years

-Not much could be done -Reduced the production acreage when predicting dry years -Has established an irrigation facility

Krishna Seed Company 1.0 Frequent droughts Significant crop losses -Reduced area of production

-Grow drought tolerant crops (Sorghum , pigeon peas)

2.0 Limited capacity of seed processing facility

Production of poor quality seed Increased costs of processing

-Has plans to seek for the loan from financial institutions to procure processing facilities

3.0 Low capacity for storage of seed

High storage damages Unable to store for longer periods of time to fetch higher seed prices

-Plans to seek for the loan from financial institutions to construct storage houses -Use storage facilities belonging to agro-dealers -Early marketing arrangement for seed

3.4.4 TANSEED International Ltd – Production and Dissemination of improved Seed of Maize, Pigeon pea, and sesame in Tanzania (2007 PASS 004)

This project was intended to undertake seed production and dissemination. Major outputs included awareness creation for improved seed by establishing 50 demonstration plots per year on 80 farms, organize a total of 10 field days, and organize for 120 farmers to participate in Agricultural shows. The project also planned to have 1680MT of seed reaching farmers by the end of the project benefiting 9000 farmers. Unfortunately the target was not realized as envisaged due to drought. . The Grantee, Mr. Mashauri, informed that despite the problem of drought the company produced 430 MT this year (2011).The company has addressed drought problem by opening seed production farms in Kilombero in Morogoro region and Kigoma where rainfall pattern is much stable than in previous locations.. The company has been linked with Root Capital based in USA for obtaining soft loan. So far they have received Tsh. 280 million.

49

3.3.5 Ministry of Agriculture Livestock and Environment - Enhancing Farmers Initiatives for Multiplication and dissemination of Cassava virus tolerant Planting Materials in Zanzibar (2007 PASS 025) - Haji H. Saleh

In the recent years, the Cassava Brown Streak Disease (CBSD) caused by cassava brown streak virus (CBSV) became the most serious abiotic problem in cassava production in Zanzibar causing total losses to farmers’ fields. Some farmers were forced to abandon their fields in favour of less sustainable alternative means of living. In the year 2006, Kizimbani Research Station in Zanzibar managed to release four improved, high yielding virus and drought tolerant varieties. The varieties released were KBH 482 (which is now called Kizimbani), KBH 494 (Mahonda), KBH 517 (Machui) and KBH 477 (Kama). Following the release, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment-Zanzibar through the Root and Tuber Crops Research Programme requested the support from AGRA to support a reliable and sustainable production and supply of virus tolerant materials to farmers in Zanzibar. Hence, the three year project on enhancing farmers’ initiatives for multiplication and delivery of virus tolerant planting materials in Zanzibar was developed and implemented from 1st October, 2008. Main objective The main objective of the project was to improve cassava production and productivity through the enhanced multiplication, dissemination and the use of disease free cassava planting materials to enhance food security and increase farmers’ income. The project was implemented through multiplication of released varieties at Kizimbani (in Unguja) and Matangatuani (in Pemba) research stations involving in station participatory variety selection, training of lead farmers on variety maintenance, husbandry, multiplication and business skills, and on-farm cassava production for seed production. About 50 farmers selected throughout Zanzibar were involved.

• Relevance The project implementation is in line with the initial MoU signed in 2008. Through participatory training lead farmers from 30 districts throughout Zanzibar (Unguja and Pemba) were invited and trained in their research demonstration plots Kizimbani (Unguja) and Matangatuani (Pemba). Four released varieties mentioned above were introduced to them. Each farmer was given 20 cuttings of each variety to introduce them into their respective locations. The project is very relevant because in three years’ time about 50 lead farmers are multiplying cassava cutting to fellow farmers located in 30 villages in Zanzibar. Other cuttings have found way to a number of villages in the mainland.

• Effectiveness o The project had a total budget of US$158,000 of which US$ 48,000 has gone on station

activities; US$ 31,000 training and meeting and US$ 25,000 into outreach (vehicle). However looking at the level of achievements in terms of number of farmers reached within and outside Zanzibar the project was very effective.

o Involving farmers to maintain, produce and distribute cuttings is the most cost effective approach. Participating farmers are now generating income from sale of cuttings to other farmers

50

o Kizimbani (in Zanzibar) and Matangatuani (in Pemba) continue to support farmers through training and study tours, linking seed producers to farmers who wants seeds, and creating and maintaining a network of seed producers such that they can communicate about seed demand, availability, problems and prospects. In addition, Government of Zanzibar through its Extension services is giving a huge support through publicity. This has created awareness among farmers thus increased demand for clean cassava cuttings

o 50 seed producers can sale to up to 1000 farmers per season, the peak being in February/March before the start of long rain season. Sale of planting materials also peaks up during the months of October/November for farmers planting cassava in short rain seasons.

• Impact o Food security has increased in Zanzibar which was threatened by diseases o Market for clean cassava has increased income of the farmers

• Sustainability o Improved varieties are now in the hands of farmers who are also known to many other

farmers. These lead farmers continue to maintain varieties, produce cassava cutting and sale to fellow farmers. The process is very sustainable as along as genetic purity is maintained by farmers who multiply the seeds.

o For continuity purpose, stakeholders interviewed requested Kizimbani research stations to continue with research/selection process to come up with new varieties which are more superior to the released varieties in order to address limitations observed in the released cultivars (e.g. bitterness)

3.5 Projects Supported under the Agro-dealer Strengthening Subprogram (TASP) - ADP

In Tanzania, a small number of households use inputs and this is particularly true of inputs that are not produced on farm such as improved seed, pesticides, inorganic fertilizer and herbicides (URT, 2006). The formal fertilizer sub-sector in Tanzania was established in 1968 when Tanzania Fertilizer Company (TFC) was formed. TFC had a monopoly on production, importation, supply and distribution of fertilizer in the country URT, 1997). Distribution to smallholder farmers was largely through primary societies and cooperatives unions that were also government institutions. This type of well-organized system plus the availability of subsidies, credit facilities and control of producer and fertilizer prices contributed to increase fertilizer consumption during this period. At present, the importation and distribution of fertilizer in the country is largely being handled by the private sector (URT 1997). As a result, smallholder farmers in the rural areas have not benefited much from the present marketing system. Regional and District agricultural offices are responsible for coordinating the distribution of subsidized inputs by the private sector. It is estimated that by the end of 1990s, about 70% of Tanzanian’s crops were cultivated by hand hoe, 20% by ox ploughs and 10% by tractors. Before the trade liberalization, Ubungo Farm Implements Ltd (UFI), in Dar-es-Salaam and Zana za Kilimo (ZZK) in Mbeya were the main manufactures and distributors of farm implements in the country. Since liberalization of trade a wide range of private traders import farm implements. UFI and ZZK were unable to face the competitions and subsequently stopped production (URT, 1997; URT 2006). The input stockists stock farm tools such as hand hoes,

51

sickles, cutlasses and sprayers. In rare cases they stock ox-drawn and tractor drawn implements. Other inputs stocked by input stockists include pesticides and fertilizers. PASS, under the agro-dealers sub-component two main projects were funded in Tanzania. These were; (i) Preparation of the Tanzania Agricultural Inputs Access Framework and Tanzania Agro dealers Strengthening Program (TASP). An analysis of the review team is presented under two separate subsections below.

3.5.1 Preparation of the Tanzania Agricultural Inputs Access Framework – (2007 PASS 025) –by Dr. Msolla

This one year project was intended to provide guidance on production, distribution and use of improved agricultural inputs to smallholder farmers in Tanzania. Unfortunately the program has not been completed partly because funds for the project were received one year late. The implementation of the project will also be assigned to a consultant who is still at the procurement stage. At the time of the evaluation the procurement was at the negotiation stage. The original budget lines for the project were re casted to accommodate a proposal by MAFSC on a seed strategy intended to produce up to 60% of the seed requirement locally. The refinement of the National Input Voucher Scheme (NAIVS) framework is expected to start in September 2011. At the time this evaluation exercise was being undertaken only one progress report had been submitted to AGRA and no financial report was available. There is also no evidence in the proposed budget as to what specific activities will be undertaken and corresponding budget to establish the fertilizer policy, legislation and guidelines as well as the review of the seed policy.

3.5.2 Tanzania Agro dealers Strengthening Program (TASP) (2007 PASS 020 CNFA) by Jason Scapone

3.5.2.1 Project Background

The goal of the Tanzania Agro dealer Strengthening Program is to transform Tanzania’s fragmented input distribution system into an efficient, commercially viable input supply infrastructure, thus enabling smallholder farmers greater access to productivity enhancing inputs and technologies, including through the Government’s Subsidy Programs.

To achieve these goals, CNFA focused on the following specific objectives:

i. Design a voucher-based distribution system for GoT-subsidized fertilizer and improved seeds informed by the constraints of the previous system;

ii. Build a more effective commercial inputs distribution system that will enable smallholder farmers access to commercially available inputs and subsidy programs;

iii. Increase the number of village-based agro dealers and gradually expand their range of products and services;

iv. Extend the role of the inputs distribution system to offer farmers greater access to credit, extension services, and demonstration activities;

v. Link the agro dealer network to local seed enterprises and diversified improved varieties; vi. Develop a model that can be rolled out on a national scale and keep pace as the GoT’s Fast

Track Program moves beyond its initial 5 Districts; and vii. Improve subsidy and other policy dialogue between the private sector and the GoT.

52

3.5.2.2 Projects design and structure

The creation of an efficient, commercially viable input supply infrastructure in Tanzania is imperative not only for the success of future GoT subsidy programs, but more broadly for smallholder farmers to access new technologies and improved inputs, including subsidized fertilizer and improved seeds. Before the program there was lack of an effective agro dealer network prevents subsidized fertilizer and commercially available inputs from reaching remote rural smallholder farmers. Currently through the implementation of this program there is a good improvement in supplying inputs to the farmers through Agro dealers’ development. Furthermore number of agro dealers increased which cut down the long distance travelling looking for inputs. For example, in Mbuguni Ward in Arusha region there are four agro dealers trained by CNFA working in different villages. CNFA managed to slot in voucher program assessment and design work, and by launching agro dealer development activities in the same five districts in the Southern zone of which the GoT has targeted for its Fast Track Subsidy Program. The districts are Mbeya, Mbarali, Mufindi, Songea, and Kilombero. Through TASP, CNFA managed to develop a network of rural agro dealers, creating a rural market infrastructure for reaching smallholder farmers with high quality inputs, technical information, and the government Fast Track Subsidy Program. By focusing on rural agro dealers – improving their business and product knowledge for improved customer service provision, creating linkages to input supply companies, stimulating access to finance and helping them build smallholder demand for improved inputs CNFA can have a catalyzing effect on the smallholder agriculture sector. Substantial achievements so recoded are summarized in Table 12.

Table 12: Achievements of TASP targets for the various components ACTIVITY OUTCOME INDICATORS Target Actual % Achieved 1 # trained & certified Agro dealers 600 1,017 170

2 # Companies participating in demand creation 25 36 144

3 #sessions of demand creation activities 92 472 513

4 #Farmers/Agro dealers attending demand creation activities 78,200 154,753 198

5 # Sessions of technical training 417 116 28

6 Volume of seed sold through TASP Agro dealers 20,000 61,302 308

7 Volume of fertilizer sold through TASP Agro dealers 110,000 596,512 542

DISTRICT ASSOCIATIONS SUPPORTED

8 # District based agro dealer Associations supported 12 20 167

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TRAINING

9 # Agro dealers and wholesalers certified 600 1017 170

10 Number of Agro dealers participating in business clinics 0 272 ????

11 Number of Agro dealers participating in training 1,120 3,489 312

12 Number of supply companies providing training 20 36 180

13 Number of training sessions (Business????) 417 138 33

DEMAND CREATION ACTIVITIES

14 # of demonstration plots established 600 1350 225

15 Number of Agro dealers involved in demos and field days 200 707 354

16 Number of field days shows and exhibitions 92 472 513

17 Number of people participating in field days shows and exhibitions

78,200 154753 198

18 Number of supply companies involved 25 36 144

CREDIT GURANTEE

19 # Agro dealers supported by the scheme 81 Na

20 # Matching investments (startups, add on, others) 202 Na

53

3.5.2.3 Suitability measurements

A: Project relevance The project has high policy relevance to the Government of Tanzania and AGRA, high relevance directly in the case of input supply such as improved seed and fertilizer to poor Tanzanian farmers), and high relevance to the needs of the small holder farmers with respect to input availability. The broad subsector approach raised the political and economic profile of the improved seeds and agro dealers’ development in TASP. However, it implied a formidable task of coordination that might not have been possible had the TASP not been delayed. The task of planning, implementation and monitoring of the TASP would have been considerably eased with a clearer project structure and better specification of indicators and targets.

B: Effectiveness The effectiveness of the Tanzania Agro dealers Strengthening Program has been highest in providing training to Agro-Dealers (AD) and linkage to microfinance banks for loans and provision of grants. Most of the Agro dealers visited companied on their existence without the project under CNFA/TAGMARK. On the other hand, positive result have been obtained on good supply of Government subsidies by trained ADs to farmer through voucher system but most ADs have not been paid by the Government which discourage them to participate in the activity the coming seasons Sessions of technical training were well below the target (28%) only suggesting that technical training was not adequately covered. Limited availability of extension staff to undertake the training was a major problem. Expand the source in future capacity building initiatives to include retired officers.

According to the Agro dealers interviewed use of improved seeds especially maize seed (Situka, Seed Co, etc.) was remarkably effective, despite intermittent problems of bad weather. The use of improved seed increased production despite fluctuations during some years. The program realized significant achievements in most of its targets and this should act as a catalyst to other agricultural stakeholders such as the local government authorities. Notwithstanding these reservations, the effectiveness of this program is outstanding. C: Efficiency With respect to project efficacy, the following points were established

• High Staff turnover has created a lot of inconveniences in the TASP Programme.

• The project intended to develop input access Framework has not efficiently been implemented due to late disbursement of funds and changes in the setup of the project to accommodate other objectives and activities. Very limited financial and technical reports for this project were available

• Variance in expenditures very high for CNFA when compared to the approved 10% variance and not much justification for the large variances was provided in the financial reports

• Consistency in reporting is lacking It appears that one target is addressed in more than one component (technical training, Business training.

• Targets for financial services for agro dealers and farmers are not set as they don’t appear in the final report. Most other proposed targets are well below the actual targets achieved suggesting that the proposed targets were not very realistic. In some instances the opposite is the case (Annex 7)

54

D: Sustainability During the MTR CNFA was advised to establish agro dealer associations through sensitization and training on the importance of associations for education, communication and advocacy services building structures from grassroots to national level. The 76.7 percent of the agro dealer interviewees were members of the agro dealers association but most of the associations were not very strong since there were no regular meetings, and some of them did not have a constitution and were not registered. Most of the associations were waiting for the assistance from CNFA to capacitate the associations before the programme concluded. Discussions with most of the agro dealers seemed to suggest that the CNFA program was good but they will likely not be able to stand alone after the CNFA was over since the associations were not strong enough to secure loans from the Bank especial those agro dealers who were dependent on government subsidies. E: Impact on rural poverty The main outcome of the programme has consisted of changes in mind set of the farmers due to the introduction of new varieties of seeds, use of inorganic fertilizers through the subsidies from the government, capacity building to Agro dealers through training provided by CNFA/TAGMARK, access to capital grants and loan. Smallholder farmers have benefited from access to agro input close to their home place due to the increase number of agro dealers. There have been some wider indirect effects of the project both positive and negative although it is difficult to assess their extent. Positive impacts have included, increased awareness to improved seeds, increased number of agro dealers, extension services improved, increased productivity, (there is a fluctuation productivity due to bad weather), Agricultural production and food security have improved and farmers’ capacity to manage their own economic affairs has improved, access to loan from microfinance institutions to agro dealers. Negative impacts include increased environmental destruction due to the increase in the use of chemical fertilizers like DAP and UREA and loss of traditional seeds. Overall, the positive impacts outweigh the negative ones but in any case, the effects seem to be small. The goals of the project were to design a voucher based distribution system for GoT-subsidized fertilizer and improved seeds informed by the constraints of the previous system, build a more effective commercial inputs distribution system that will enable smallholder farmers access to commercially available inputs and subsidy programs, increase the number of village-based Agro dealers and gradually expand their range of products and services, extend the role of the inputs distribution system to offer farmers greater access to credit, extension services, and demonstration activities, link the Agro dealers network to local seed enterprises and diversified improved varieties, develop a model that can be rolled out on a national scale and keep pace as the GoT’s Fast Track Program moves beyond its initial 5 Districts; and improve subsidy and other policy dialogue between the private sector and the GoT. Generally a large part of the goal (about 80%)was achieved but empowerment of farmers to access credit was not significantly achieved since more effort was on agro dealer loan and grant provision. About 76 percent of the agro dealers interviewed joined the Agro dealers associations with one network established to date. The agro dealers associations established in the surveyed regions are KyelaAgro-dealers Association, Mbozi Agro-dealers Association, Arusha Association for National Agriculture (AANA), Meru Agro-dealers Association (MADA), Tanzania National

55

Agro-dealers Association (TANADA), Bagamoyo Agro-dealers Association (BAA), Kilosa Agro-dealers Network.

56

4.0 LESSONS LEARNED, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Training Component (EACI)

• Masters degree training Program started two years later than intended time because of delays in AGRA proposal approval and transfer of research funds. As a result completion date was extended by three months. Approval and disbursement procedures should be streamlined to avoid delays in implementation of projects

• Limited number of applicants for PhD was revealed to be caused by lack of an effective mechanism to advertise the awards. PASS is urged to present open announcements through local newspapers rather than relying on web page and local contacts.

• The availability of grants was claimed to be not very transparent because it was mainly

based on who knows who and previous links with either programme officers or programs such as Rockefeller foundation. Availability of grants should be made open to would be the researchers.

• Through the initial efforts to supports postgraduates studies, the Government has started to give bursaries to her employees in ARIs for postgraduate training in different universities within and outside the country as indicated in Table 13 below

Table 13: Government Initiatives for Training Plant Breeders in Tanzania

S/N Name Sex Institute employed

Degree Started Finish Sponsor University

1 Aloyce Moshi

M Mikocheni MSc 2010/11 2011/12 ASDP UDSM

2 R. Lusewa M Ukiriguru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 EAAPP Makerere

3 Z Machunde M Ukiriguru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 EAAPP SUA

4 I. Ngolinda M Makutopora MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

5 I. Kachiwle M Mikocheni MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

6 H. Musaa F Ukiriguru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

7 J. J. Simuda M Ukiriguru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

8 E. V. Laswai M Tengeru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

9 D. H. Bivugle

F Makutopora MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

10 G.. Kindimba

F Tengeru MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

11 A. Ndee M Mikocheni MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

12 L. Sabula M Uyole MSc 2010/11 2011/12 COSTECH SUA

13 Justin Ringo M Tumbi PhD 2009/10 2012/13 ASDP Moi

14 IgnathRwiza M Ukiriguru PhD 2010/11 2013/14 ASDP SUA

15 Rose Mongi F Uyole PhD 2011/12 2014/15 ASDP S Africa

16 H. Tusegeleke

M Cholima PhD 2009/10 2012/13 EAAPP SUA

17 A Blaro M Tumbi PhD 2011/12 2014/15 EAAPP SUA

1189 T. T. Kessy M Katrin PhD 2010/11 2013/14 COSTECH SUA

19 M.Robertson M Ilonga PhD 2010/11 2013/14 COSTECH SUA

57

4.2 Plant Breeding Research Component (FIACC)

• Plant breeder’s rights are an important aspect for sustainability and quality assurance of released varieties. This initiative has not officially been affected. Unfortunately some of the varieties released in this project as well as other donor funded projects have no provision for plant breeder’s rights.

• AGRA does not take into consideration the nature of the crop involved in the research e.g. cassava takes a longer breeding cycle when compared to other crops such as maize. Therefore intended outputs may not be realized within the project timeframe.

• Drought stress problems may also have a significant effect on the time of completion of the breeding projects. It is recommended that provision of irrigation or faster breeding techniques such as molecular markers should be employed to speed up the breeding process. Currently, breeding activities are undertaken using the conventional techniques which are highly dependent on rainfall.

• Lack of financial resources by institutions such as TOSCI leads to delays in approval of seed released by such the Committees. AGRA should consider support to TOSCI to implement their role on time for the release of developed varieties

4.3 Seed Production Projects Component (SEPA)

• Seed production initiatives by private companies are not well coordinated and linked to government efforts. AGRA needs to support a coordination system its support to the private sector seed producers to establish roles and responsibilities of different partners including the government avoid duplication of effort and resources. The public private sector partnership could to be optimized through such coordination.

• Tanzania is not accredited to international systems such as ISTA.As a result if there is an overproduction of seed the seed cannot be sold outside the country. Facilitation of relevant institution to acquire the accreditation status is necessary.

• The amount of seed produced by small scale seed producers is very limited compared to the seed requirement in the country. Support to small-scale seed producers in terms of business development access to credit and marketing strategies is important to help them stand on their own

4.4 Tanzania Agro dealer Strengthening Programme (TASP)

4.4.1 Agro-dealers Survey Findings

General overview

The survey covered 30 agro dealers in 6 regions Arusha, Pwani, Dar as Salaam Mtwara, Tanga and Morogoro where 13 towns were visited by the evaluation team. 87 percent of the respondents were the owner of the business while 13% were just employees.

CNFA’s strategy to build a nationwide agro dealer network is comprised of three components which are: to advise Government Subsidy Programs and Advancing Agricultural, Policy building agro dealer Capacity to Serve Farmers and improving Financial Services for Agribusiness

58

4.4.1.2 Government Subsidy Programs and Agricultural Policy

AGRA targets the poorest farmers in Africa, and the voucher system is specifically suited to their needs. This system has already worked wonders in many African countries with seeds. Likewise, farmers, who would be excluded from access to fertilizer in any scheme involving cash, are directly benefited by the voucher system.

In the survey the team found that, for the agro dealer visited they managed to supply inputs to farmers through voucher system and the activity was well made. For example they manage to supply an average of 4.76 MT of Minjingu Rock Phosphate (MRP), 1007.97MT of UREA and 1668.58 of Di-Ammonium Phosphate (DAP) as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Amount of fertilizer supplied by agro-dealers through voucher system in Metric Tons

On the other hand the evaluation team found that, agro dealers visited managed to supply improved maize seeds like DK 8053, seed co Hybrid, Staha TMV Kenya 614, Ilonga, Panner, Situka and Katumani as illustrated in the Figure 2 (units in MT).

59

Figure 3: Volume of improved maize seeds (in MT) supplied by surveyed agro-dealers

Improved seeds found during survey were not released during the time horizon of PASS projects because 3.3 percent of the agro dealers interviewed started selling improved seed since 1987; this implies that the improved seeds developed during the life of PASS projects (FIAAC projects) were not yet released to date.

4.4.1.3 Prices of fertilizers

Inorganic fertilizer has become a critical input in agricultural production. Price has always been a major issue in the fertilizer sector in Tanzania. Over the years the Tanzanian government has alternated between subsidizing fertilizer prices to fluctuate with the market

The evaluation team did attempt to assess the Agro dealers (ADs) on the price of fertilizers in Kyela (6 ADs,) Mbozi (3 ADs) Maji ya chai (1 AD), Bagamoyo (1 AD), Arusha (3AD),Mbeya (1 AD), Singisi (1 ADs), Mbuguni (1 ADs) USA river (1 AD), Tengeru (1 AD), Dar es salaam (2 ADs), Dumila (4 ADs) and Morogoro (4 ADs) to confirm information provided by respondents in the farmers interviewed. The team visited 30 shops in the mentioned towns and found the average price of Di-Ammonium Phosphate (DAP) was TZS 39 375 per 50kg bags, UREA was TZS 23 441 per 50 kg bag while Minjingu Rock Phosphate (MRP) was TZS 12 416 per 2bgs of 50kgs. Despite of low prices of fertilizer due to subside from the GoT but some farmers still won’t afford to purchase the fertilizers due to low household income.

4.4.1.4 Improved Financial Services for Agribusiness

Access to finance is another crucial element in agribusiness growth done by CNFA. In Tanzania

Agro dealer Strengthening Program (TASP), certified agro dealers gained access to credit guarantees that mitigate risk for banks (NMB) and matching grants to promote investment in new

60

business start-ups, value addition enterprises and output marketing ventures. As appropriate, CNFA also works directly with NMB banks to facilitate access to short term credit for agro dealers.

The lack of access to startup capital was a major constraint preventing general rural retailers and aspiring business people from establishing full agro dealerships. For CNFA to realize its goal of establishing 840 agro dealers, being able to provide them with access to start-up capital was essential. The successful start-up of more agro dealerships increased the efficiency of investment return for other AGRA funded activities, including PASS trainings. CNFA addressed this issue through capitalizing AITF to extend credit and grant opportunities to agro dealers and output marketing and as well as to other rural enterprises for post-harvest handling capacity and small scale processing; local seed enterprises for capital investments and improvements; and to smallholder farmers for input purchases.

During the survey 66 percent of the respondents (Agro dealers) interviewed, applied to access loan from Micro finance institutions under the assistance of CNFA as guarantor in which 63.3 percent agro dealers thrived to acquire a short term loan from National Microfinance Bank (NMB). Other respondents acquired grants as capital investment where they manage to rehabilitate their shops and purchasing farm implements like tractors as show in the plate 1 below.

4.4.1.5 Sources of initial Investment of agro dealership About 53.3 percent of the agro dealer agreed on the fact that, the loan acquire do support their business while the rest disagreed. The sources of the initial capital for the agro dealership were family, personal saving, farming, loan and other businesses.

Figure 4: Sources of initial investment of agro dealership

All the agro dealers visited their sells improved seeds, 80% they sale farm implements while 50 % they sell also animal feeds but none of the agro dealer sells food staff in their shops, and this implies that they got a recommended dose of training from CNFA on how to handle agrochemicals to avoid contamination with food staff.

61

Figure 5: Mzee Apaikunda (Agro dealer) from Mbuguni ward in Meru District looking at a tractor granted by CNFA under TASP.

4.4.1.6 Building Agro-dealer Capacity to Serve Farmers

Business Management Training Program: this program will build the professional capacity of rural retailers and local seed companies through commercially-provided training leading to certification. Training in Product Knowledge and safe use: the program provided technical training on product usage, handling, and safety to rural agro dealers through commercial training and product-specific input supplier-led training to increase agro dealer capacity to provide technical advice to customers. Generation of Market Demand for Improved Inputs: Demonstration plots and field days will facilitate partnerships between agro dealers and input suppliers to increase product knowledge, stimulate demand, and accelerate uptake of new technologies by smallholder farmers. During survey the evaluation team managed to discuss with the agro dealers on the training provided by the CNFA. All appreciated on the training provided since they broaden their knowledge on business management safe use of agrochemicals est. The following are the training modules provided to agro dealers.

• Product knowledge training for safe, handling application course

• Agri – input product knowledge and marketing development

• Business management skills o Managing working capital o Managing stock o Selling and Marketing o Basic Business record keeping o Costing and pricing o Managing business relationship

• Output marketing

62

o Agricultural marketing value chain Structure o Introduction to agricultural marketing o Cereal banking and Aggregation

Figure 6(a): Certificates conferred to trained Agro dealers

63

Figure 6(b): Certificates conferred to trained Agro dealers

4.4.2 Lessons Learnt

• Improved seeds and fertilizers supply through agro dealers should only be used to complement other policies and existing programmes and never as an isolated strategy. Short-term measures should be done in the context of medium to long term approaches.

• Supply of inputs without training or other associated technical assistance is of limited use. Any agriculture input supply programme should be accompanied by training and complemented by policy advice on how to strengthen the resilience of the agricultural sector.

• The use of revolving schemes or equity contribution systems should be considered. Such systems can help to ensure continuity in project investments after it has been completed. The use of revolving schemes, where beneficiaries pay back seeds they have received after the harvest or pay a subsidized amount for inputs in cash that can subsequently be used to buy more inputs or be invested in micro projects, can also help to improve ownership in the project, targeting and use of inputs received by the beneficiaries.

• Supply of agricultural inputs through agro dealers has proven itself to be an effective way of targeting and supply inputs to beneficiaries. If they have technical knowledge on the crops being produced this can help to ensure that farmers are properly trained on the use of inputs and might assure that beneficiaries are better informed on the use of the inputs in question.

• In addition to technology, there is a need to promote an adequate access to rural infrastructure in strengthening growth in agriculture as well as in the non-farm economy and rural towns.

• Agricultural research and extension services should be significantly expanded and promoted in order to increase agricultural productivity. Higher investments in rural infrastructure, water and land management, communications and marketing and improved provision of health and education services are essential in raising farmers` productivity. The voucher system has resulted in a number of shortcomings that need to be addressed including additional capacity building on various aspects of the management of the voucher. The possibility of introducing an electronic voucher system which will likely make it easier to monitor and avoid current levels of cheating should be explored Strengthening Agro dealer Associations will also form part of the solution.

• High Staff turnover has created a lot of inconveniences in the TASP Programme. Everybody who comes into the project has his/her own approach which creates problems in continuity. The M&E for TASP was undertaken by an institution appointed by CNFA rather than AGRA itself which makes it difficult to avoid biasness

64

• CNFA was mostly involved in business development training and very limited agronomic activities particularly with respect to IPM and ISFM. Soil Testing services presented in the proposal have not featured very well in the reports.

• The project intended to develop input access Framework has not effectively been implemented due to late disbursement of funds and changes in the setup of the project to accommodate other objectives and activities. Limited financial and technical reports for this project were available

• Variance in expenditures very high for CNFA when compared to the approved 10% variance and not much justification for the large variances was provided in the financial reports

• Sessions of technical training were well below the target (28%) only suggesting that technical training was not adequately covered. Limited availability of extension staff to undertake the training was a major problem. Expand the source in future capacity building initiatives to include retired officers.

• Consistency in reporting is lacking It appears that one target is addressed in more than one component (technical training, Business training. May be combining the training to cover different topics for the same participants is recommended.

• Targets for financial services for agro dealers and farmers are not set as they don’t appear in the final report. Most other proposed targets are well below the actual targets achieved suggesting that the proposed targets were not very realistic. In some instances the opposite is the case (Annex 7)

4.5 Results from Farmers’ survey

4.5.1 Background

The survey covered a total of 255 farmers in six districts (Bagamoyo, Arumeru, Kati, Mbozi, Mbeya, and Kilosa. The average number of members in the households covered is about 5 of which about 50% are men and 50% are women. The average age of the head of the household being 46.8 years and the average number of household members below 18 years is only 2% and average number of household members with the age between 18 -60 years is 3. Most household members have only 6 years of education (6 years). Basic characteristics of the farmers interviewed are presented in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Basic characteristics of the respondents

Proportion of respondents by farm size Number of household members

65

4.5.2 Crops grown in the areas covered Major crops grown in Bagamoyo district are Cassava (90.2%), sweet potato (53.7%), cowpeas (19.5%) and Pigeon peas (17.1%). Dominant crops in Arumeru are maize (88.4%) followed by beans (14 %) while in Mbozi maize (97.7%) followed by beans (90.7%) and groundnuts (69.8%) and dominant crops. Dominant crops in Kati are cassava (97.7%). Dominant crop in Mbeya is maize (100%). Dominant crop in Kilosa is maize (95%) and Paddy (23.8%). Overall, the average situation suggests that maize is the most preferred stable as reported by 64.6% of the total households. Highest proportion of farmers who solely depend on maize was recorded in Ulanga district, Beans (34.3%) and cassava (32.8%) commands second and third position respectively (Figure 8) Figure 8: Average proportion of Farmers Growing different Crops

Average proportion of farmers growing

different crops in the surveyed districts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Maize

Bea

ns

Cas

sava

Coffee

Pad

dy

Groun

dnuts

Swee

t po

tato

Sun

flower

Type of crop grown

% o

f fa

rmers

gro

win

g the cro

p

Analysis of main varieties planted by farmers was done to gauge the level of dissermination of information from breeders, seed producers and farmers. SEEDCo was the most grown maize varieties as it was reported by 25% of farmers. Highest propostion (>60%) was reported in Mbeya followed by Arumeru (Table 14). Pannar is the second most traded varieties. From Table 14 Situka is more preferred in Arumeru, Uyole 615 in Mbozi, and Staha is very popular n Kilosa. This variability suggest for the need to bring many varieties in the market.

66

Table 14: Maize varieties grown by farmers in different maize growing districts

Maize variety Name of the districts surveyed

Arumeru Mbozi Mbeya Kilosa Average

SEEDCO 26.3 9.5 65.9 0 25.4

Pannar 2.6 42.9 0.0 0.0 11.4

Staha 2.6 0.0 0.0 37.5 10.0

Hybrid 10.5 7.1 0.0 20.0 9.4

Situka 28.9 0.0 0.0 2.5 7.9

SeedCo 13.2 0.0 0.0 5.0 4.6

Uyole 615 0.0 14.3 2.4 0.0 4.2

Local 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 1.9

Uyole 615 0.0 0.0 14.6 0.0 3.7

TMV & Staha 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 3.8

In Zanzibar, the dominant cassava variety grown is Kizimbani (37.3%), Mfaransa (32.5(%) and Machui (8.4%) (see Table 15). Most popular Maize varieties include (Pundamlia from SEEDCO, (24.6%) and Panner (11.4%), Staha (9.6%). Most popular bean varieties are Kablanketi (46.7%), Light yellow (8.7%) bwana shamba (5.4%) and Doroe (5.7%), while rice varieties include Super (36.1%) bwana mrefu (19.4) and super Machare (11.1%)

Table 15: Proportion of cassava varieties planted in major cassava growing area (Bagamoyo and Kati districts)

Source of information about seed are other farmers (43.8%), Seed stores (14.2%) and government officials Research and Extension (13.8 %) while the main source of seed is through exchange by other farmers (36.1%) extension staff (15.7%), Research institutions (13.9%) and Farmer Groups (13.9%), Table 16 below. Limited dependence on compost and green manure was apparent mainly because of lack of fertilizer or lack of reliable transport to reach remote villages Table 16: Sources of information about seed (%)

Variable Cassava Maize G’nuts S/potato Beans P/pea Sorghum

C/pea Average%

Other farmers 54.2 29.9 16.7 79.2 55.2 27.3 - - 43.8

Seed/cereal stores 1.2 5.7 8.3 - 28.7 - - 27.3 14.2

Government officials

4.8 41.4 4.2 4.2 5.7 18.2 - 18.2 13.8

Farmer groups 16.9 4.5 4.2 8.3 3.4 9.1 - 9.1 7.9

Research centers 20,5 7.0 - - 2.3 - 20.8 - 7.5 Radio/Tv - 3.2 - - - - - 9.1 6.2

NGO/CBO 2.4 3.8 - - - 9.1 - 9.1 6.1

Agro-dealers - 1.3 - - - 9.1 - - 5.2 Seminars - 1.3 - - - - - - 1.3

Field schools - 0.6 - - - - - 0.6

Cassava variety District (Region)

Bagamoyo (Pwani) Kati (Zanzibar)

Kizimbani 0.0 72.1

Mfaransa 75.0 0.0

Machui 0.0 16.3

Kiroba 13.9 0.0

Kiposa 0.0 4.7

67

Out of 54 farmers growing improved cassava, maize and beans varieties were rated for different characteristics were rated for each crop. For cassava about 46% of the farmers indicated that they are getting good yields, 46% indicated that the cassava has good color, 40 % are getting average size of the cassava, 42 % good stover residue 55% good resistance to diseases, 50 % good resistance to pests and diseases, 41% felt it took a long time to grow, 25 % felt it has an average demand for labor, 25% average demand for non- labor input 46 % said marketability is high, Time for cooking is relatively short (15%) Taste is good (39.7%). And processing is good (41.4%) All the parameters used for cassava were also used to rate the maize and beans crop and overall all of them were rated as average at different percentage levels. Figure 9: Sources of information about new seed varieties in the market

68

5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings discussed above the following conclusions are pushing the reports through.,

• Resources provided by the PASS program to implement projects in the various components were quite satisfactory. In a few cases disbursement of these financial resources slightly delayed due to sometimes failing to meet the conditions set in the LOA or due to some other administrative problems within or donor community.

• SUA has proved to be a competent institution to train MSC students for the PASS program and is also likely to do well in training breeders at the PhD level due to increased capacity. Subjects covered and gender balance is as presented in the proposal. In order to cope with the high rates of retirement of and aging of available breeders in the government system the number of students to be trained at SUA should be increased considerably.

• Activities implemented under the Breeding component of PASS were accomplished under a satisfactory level of effectiveness and efficiency and most cases measures to ensure sustainability after project completion were observed. The only constraint experienced for some of the projects such as the cassava was drought stress which demanded an additional year to complete the NPT Tests

• Although the law and certification of institutions such as TOSCI are well developed in Tanzania the enforcement of such laws is not effectively implemented because of lack of adequate financial, human resources as well as equipment experienced by such institutions.

• Enforcement of the plant breeders rights is likely to be a big incentive to retain experienced plant breeders in the research system

• Support to small scale seed producers is necessary to in terms of business development access to credit and marketing skills to enable them stand on their own

• CNFA/TAGMARK has achieved remarkable progress towards achievement of most of the TASP objectives. Access to inputs combined with increased knowledge on the use and handling of inputs has led to increased productivity and hence greater food security. CNFA/TAGMARK activities in Tanzania were very extensive both in area and coverage, number of farmers reached and the horizontal and vertical network established.

• One out of the 11 projects has not accomplished substantial progress due to delay in disbursement of funds, change in the project set to incorporate MAFSc Request and the long procedure required to procure a consultant Only one progress report was available for this project The second project was difficult to evaluate because the grantee was not available for the interviews.

• OVERALL the value chain approach involving access to inputs, credit facilities extension initiatives for improved production practices and enhancing market capacities are all necessary to enhance farming as a business. Processing will also lead to value addition and increased access to output markets

69

6.0 REFERENCES Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa Mid-Term Review of the Program for Africa Seed

Systems Final Report September 2010. Program for Africa Seed Systems (PASS) Business Plan March 2007. Prepared by Cambridge

Economic Policy Associates. Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa Program for Africa Seed Systems (PASS) Tools for

PASS Expired Projects Evaluation in Tanzania, Inception Report July 2011 National Public Private Partnership (PPP) Policy, Prime Minister’s Office November 2009

70

7.0 ANNEXES 7.1 Terms of Reference The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is a partnership of the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and UK Department for International Development (DFID) working with African Governments, other donors, NGOs the Private Sector and African farmers to significantly and sustainably improve the productivity and incomes of resource poor farmers in Africa. AGRA’s vision is of a food secure and prosperous Africa achieved through rapid, sustainable agricultural growth based on smallholder farmers who are primarily engaged in the production of staple food crops in Africa. The main goals of AGRA by 2020 are to: i) Reduce food insecurity by 50 percent in at least 20 countries ii) Double the incomes of 20 million smallholder families and iii) Put at least 30 countries on track towards attaining and sustaining a uniquely African Green Revolution. AGRA’s strategy operates across four programmatic areas. The four programmatic areas which work in an integrated manner across all three portfolios are the Seeds, Soil health, Market Access and Policy and Partnerships. Other areas such as water, extension, gender and youth will be incorporated into the four programs. The Program for African Seed System (PASS) which started in 2007 funds agro-ecology based crop breeding by national and local research programs; coordinates with the CGIAR system to rapidly disseminate existing improved seed varieties; fosters the development of a vibrant, competitive seed sector; supports the development of national agro-dealer networks- village retailers who get farm inputs to remote farmers; partners with African universities to train the next generation of African agricultural scientists; and advocates for seeds regulatory frameworks that make high quality, affordable seed available to smallholder farmers.

PASS consists of four sub-programs that focus on different elements of the input supply value chain. These are Education for African Crop Improvement (EACI), the Fund for the Improvement and Adoption of African Crops (FIAAC), the Seed Production for Africa Initiative (SEPA) and the Agro-Dealer Development Program (ADP).

The Program’s objectives are organized in terms of the major results that are expected from each of its four sub-programs:

• EACI provides funding for the training of new generation of crop breeders and agricultural scientists upon which seed systems depend for growth and productivity. Training under this sub-program is conducted in nine (9) universities across seven (7) countries and has primarily focused on master’s and doctoral level and has up to December 2010 successfully graduated about forty (40) students. These graduates are expected to join the critical mass of scientists developing improved seed varieties in research institutions across Africa.

• FIAAC funds crop breeding in Africa to improve African crop varieties and promote their adoption by smallholder farmers. FIAAC has facilitated the release and dissemination of over 154 improved seed varieties across 13 sub-Saharan African countries by December 2010 that is expected to boost the yield levels of smallholder farmers. These released improved varieties should reach the smallholder farmer through the activities of seed companies and agro-dealers.

71

• SEPA helps ensure that improved crop varieties are produced and distributed through private and public channels (including seed companies, publicly-supported seed programs and public extension) so that farmers can adopt these varieties. SEPA, through its support to small private seed companies has up-to-date supported the production and distribution of 25,000 MT of improved seed varieties across 13 sub-Saharan African countries.

• ADP provides training and credit to establish and support the growth of small agro-dealers, who are a primary conduit of seeds, fertilizers, and knowledge on their proper use, to smallholder farmers to increase their productivity and incomes. ADP has facilitated the training of over 9000 rural agro-dealers across 9 sub-Saharan African countries with the objective of delivering improved inputs to smallholder farmers in an affordable, efficient and effective manner.

Objectives of the evaluations

Over fifty (50) PASS supported projects ended by December 2010. The AGRA M&E Unit is seeking for consultants/firms to undertake evaluations of expired projects in six (6) sub Saharan African countries. The objectives of the evaluations are to assess:

a) The extent to which project’s major objectives were achieved

b) How economically project’s converted inputs into results

c) The status of project outputs /results and whether results has translated into benefits

to the smallholder famer (if yes, how)

d) The likelihood of continued, long term benefits from project results

Scope

The country based evaluations will assess the performance of randomly selected expired projects in six (6) selected countries. The evaluations will deal with the question of whether the randomly selected expired projects have efficiently and effectively delivered on agreed outputs/results and how these results (if any) have moved along the uptake pathways towards addressing the productivity needs of the smallholder farmer. Additionally, the evaluations will assess the benefits (direct or indirect, positive or negative) from project outputs and the sustainability of project results.

Country Number /Project Objectives

Sub-programs EACI FIAAC SEPA ADP

Ghana 3 1 - 2 -

Nigeria 5 2 1 2 -

Kenya 12 - 7 4 1

Uganda 7 1 5 1 -

Tanzania 10 - 5 3 2

Malawi 3 - 1 1 1

Key Deliverables

The consultants/firms will review key documents produced by grantees, program officers and other partners; such documents shall include but are not limited to the background program document, grant proposals, project progress and final reports, consultancy reports, and other documents related to PASS. The consultants will also review relevant literature related to the assignment and carry out data collection using approved methodologies by the AGRA M&E Unit to obtain information that meets the objectives outlined above.

72

The consultants will be required to submit to AGRA’s M&E unit:

• Inception Report which should be delivered not later than 14 days from the date of

signing contract

• Draft reports (a draft report will be required for comment team prior to finalization);

• Oral presentation to the AGRA management, PASS team and M&E Unit when required;

• A master copy of the final report suitable for reproduction

• Presentation of the final report, including recommendations

• Soft copies of the final report

Reporting

During the course of the evaluations, the consultants/firms will be required to report regularly on progress.

Management

The consultants will report directly to the Director- Monitoring and Evaluation. The PASS M&E Program Officer will facilitate and coordinate the evaluations by the consultants/firms. To ensure objectivity and credibility of the evaluations, the assessment will be conducted by external consultants/firms who have had no prior commitment or major contribution to the PASS program.

Timing

The evaluations are expected to be completed within a 90 - day period.

In-house Resources

Access to files, databases, contacts for grantees, financial records and other program related files depending on the consultant’s requirements will be availed. Access to program Director and staff will be guaranteed.

Specifications of the Consultant Teams

The consultants will be selected on the basis of their proven experience, qualifications and ability to deliver a quality product in a timely and efficient manner. Minimum qualifications and experience of the team members will include:

• MSc in Agricultural Sciences, Social Sciences, or related field and at least 5 years of relevant experience (leader);

• 5 years’ experience in survey fieldwork (data collection, validation, entry and analysis)

• Proven track record in conducting evaluations in sub-Saharan Africa;

• Experience in leading teams in field (training, field logistics, human relations, teamwork)

• Demonstrable ability, experience and the capacity to undertake the assessment in different countries;

• Excellent writing skills, with publication record in one discipline related to assignment

• Demonstrable analytical skills;

• Past related experience in sub-Saharan Africa; and

• Excellent English communication skills.

73

7.2: Instruments Used in Data Collection ( ReferTools Document)

7.2.1 Farmers Questionnaire

74

7.2.2 Breeders Questionnaire

75

7.2.3 Seed Companies Questionnaire

76

7.2.4 Agro dealers Questionnaire

77

7.2.5 Training sub component

78

7.3 Itinerary of the Review Team

Zone Planned activity Proposed dates Responsible persons

Preparatory Activities

i. Selection of field staff ii. Training Workshop & Pre –

testing of tools

4 Aug 2011 9 – 12 Aug 2011

Team Leader / Deputy Team Leader & Project Coordinator

Field Activities / Data Collection

Northern:

Arusha: i. Checklists (Policy Officials,

Breeders, Seed Company & Seed Systems)

ii. Questionnaires (Mbuguni - farmers)

15 Aug – 03 Sept 2011

i. Robert Kileo – Group

Leader

ii. Frank Lyimo - Supervisor

iii. Dr. Nyaki – Team Leader

iv. Data Collectors

Southern (Mtwara)

Mtwara (On farm Bagamoyo): i. Checklist: (Policy officials) ii. Questionnaires (Chamanzi –

farmers)

15 Aug – 03 Sept 2011

i. Dr. Joseph Hella – Group Leader (Deputy Team Leader)

ii. Abiud Bongole - Supervisor

i. Data Collectors

Eastern Dar es Salaam: i. Checklists (Policy Officials –

Ministry & Seed unit) Zanzibar: i. Checklists (Policy Officials ,

Breeder, Seed Company & Seed Systems)

ii. Questionnaires (Machui - farmers)

Morogoro: i. Checklists (Policy Officials –

Ministry, SUA & Seed Company) ii. Questionnaires (Dumila - farmers)

01 – 03 Sept 2011 15 Aug – 03 Sept 2011 15 Aug – 03 Sept 2011

iii. Dr. Joseph Hella – Group Leader (Deputy Team Leader)

iv. Abiud Bongole - Supervisor

v. Data Collectors

Southern Highlands

Mbeya: i. Checklists (Policy Officials,

Breeders, Seed Company & Seed Systems)

ii. Questionnaires (Uyole- farmers) iii. Questionnaires (Msiya - farmers)

15 Aug – 03 Sept 2011

i. Mr. Robert Kileo – Group Leader

ii. Frank Lyimo - Supervisor iii. Abiud Bongole –

Supervisor iv. Data Collectors

Data Entry, Analysis and Reporting

Other Activities

i. Data entry ii. Data Analysis & Zero Draft

report 1 iii. Stakeholders Workshop iv. Draft Report 2 v. Presentation to AGRA vi. Final Report

05 – 08 Sept 2011 09 - 28 Sept 2011 30 Sept 2011 03 Oct 2011 07 Oct 2011 11 Oct 2011

i. Data entry clerks & Supervisors

79

7.4 Team composition

Name of Staff

Area of Expertise Position Assigned

Task Assigned

Dr. Shekania Bisanda

• Agriculture

• Research

• M&E

• Assessments

• Surveys, Socio - economist

Team Leader • Team leader

• Oversee all technical aspects

• Time delivery & Quality control

• Mobilization meetings

• Design tools & schedule all surveys

• Oversight of data collection

• Analysis

• Dissemination of research findings

• Report writing

Dr. Joseph Hella

• Agricultural Surveys, Assessment;

• Extension services

• Market Access

• Value Chains

Agro Economist

Deputy Team Leader / Survey Coordinator

• Quality control

• Preliminary review of documents

• Design and schedule all surveys

• Oversight of data collection

• Analysis

• Report writing

• Workshop coordinator

Ms. Catherine Kabungo

• M&E

• Agriculture research

• Surveys

Agro economist / Statistics

• Quality Control

• Support the design of research tools

• Supervise data collection, data management and analysis

• Report writing

Mr. Abiud J. Bongole

• Agricultural Surveys, Assessment;

• Extension services

• Market Access

• Value Chains

Agro Economist

Agro economist / Statistics

• Preliminary review of documents

• Analysis Design of Evaluation tool

• Development of data screen

• Training of data entry Clerks

• Data cleaning

• Data Analysis

• Draft Report

Mr. Robert Kileo

• Agriculture

• M&E

• Assessments

• Research

• Farming Systems and Value Chain Agro Economist

Agro-economist/ Farming Systems

• Support the design of research instruments

• Supervise data collection, management and analysis

• Data cleaning

• Data Analysis

• Draft Report

• Final Report

Mr. George Mziray

• Monitoring & Evaluation

• Project Management

• Research

• Policy Analyst

Project Management / M&E (back-up)

• Logistics

• Quality control

• Mobilization meeting

• Support workshop coordinator

• Communication with client

• Facilitate the preparation of reports according to agreed time-lines.

Dr. Nyaki • Agriculture

• Farming systems

• Soils scientist

Soil Scientist (Back up for Team Leader)

• As per Team Leaders Tasks

80

7.5 List of people contacted

7.5.1 List of People contacted in- Zanzibar

1. Haji Saleh, Director - Kizimbani Research Station Zanzibar 2. Haji Hamis Fundi, Assistant Director - Kizimba Research Zanzibar

3. Fatma K. Khamis, Kizimbani Research Station Zanzibar

4. MussaMiraji, Sheha of ShehiaMachui village

5. Suleiman Deve, Cassava seed multiplier Machui village

6. Suleiman Thabit, Assistant Sheha Machui village

7. Said Issa, Cassava seed multiplier Kizimbani

7.5.2 Agro-dealers contacted 1. Braison J. Msomba- Kyela

2. ZainabuRamadhani - Arusha

3. Daimon Oden – Kyela

4. Matilda M. Sanga – Mbeya

5. Abdul K. Mwinyi –Kyela

6. Martin Chaludaga – VwawaMbozi

7. Richard Kachonge- MlowoMbozi

8. HamisUlenjeNyerenga –MlowoMbozi

9. GlovinMlope – Mbeya

10. Dora Mbuya - Maji ya chaiArusha

11. Carolin E. Kiungai - SingisiArusha

12. ApaikundaTimon – MbuguniArusha

13. Frank SimboKombe – Arusha

14. Denis Elibamawala – Arusha

15. Godfrey Mwakitalu – Kyela

16. Peter Wilson Oloo - USA River

17. Luitiko Mwakyoma – Kyela

18. James J. MasaweTengeruArusha

19. Enezaeli Mbise – TengeruArusha

20. Roda Magaigwa – Dar es Salaam

21. Jonathan Haule – Bagamoyo

22. Mrs Cecilia P. Mrema – Dar es Salaam

23. Bonifasi Maliki – DumilaMorogoro

24. EstomihMakyao – DumilaMorogoro

25. IddOmary – DumilaMorogoro

26. Adam Hasim – DumilaMorogoro

27. Lilian E. Kanyabuha – Morogoro

28. Thomas Mushi –Morogoro

29. Ambrose Ngatinga – Morogoro

30. Mohamed Ngaula –Morogoro

81

7.5.3 People contacted at SUA 1 Dr Cornel Rweyemamu, Project PI – Head of Department 0f Crop Science 2 Aida Magelanga - AGRA sponsored MSc students 3 Anna Batazary - AGRA sponsored MSc students 4 JumaMatonya - AGRA sponsored MSc students 5 John Lobulu - AGRA sponsored MSc students

7.5.4 Other stakeholders contacted

1 Mrs F. Myovella – DALDO Bagamoyo 2 Mr. PatrickNgwediaki - Registrar Plant Breeders Rights MAFSC 3 Dr. Hussein Mansoor - Assistant Director Crop Research MAFSC 4 Mr. Lombadia - Directorate Crop Development (Inputs (MAFSC) 5 Dr. Andrew Msolla - Grantee MAFSC 6 Elimpaa Kiranga - Ag. Director General Cereals and Crop Board 7 Dr. Saadan – CNFA TAGMARK DSM 8 Dr. Mkamilo - Grantee Cassava Project ARI Naliendele 9 Adelmardi A. Makata - Assistant chairman TANADA 10 Helladius Tesha – Chairman TANADA Morogoro 11 Dionis Mahilange - District Agricultural Extension Officer (DAEO) Bagamoyo.

82

7.6 Achievements of TASP Targets for the various components ACTIVITY OUTCOME INDICATORS LOA

TARGET ACTUAL

% ACHIEVED

1 # trained & certified Agro dealers 600 1,017 170%

2 # Companies participating in demand creation 25 36 144%

3 #sessions of demand creation activities 92 472 513%

4 #Farmers/Agro dealers attending demand creation activities

78,200 154,753 198%

5 # Sessions of technical training 417 116 28%

6 Volume of seed sold through TASP Agro dealers 20,000 61,302 308%

7 Volume of fertilizer sold through TASP Agro dealers

110,000 596,512 542%

DISTRICT ASSOCIATIONS SUPPORTED

8 # District based agro dealer Associations supported 12 20 167%

BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TRAINING

9 # Agro dealers and wholesalers certified 600 1017 170%

10 Number of Agro dealers participating in business clinics

0 272 ????

11 Number of Agro dealers participating in training 1,120 3,489 312%

12 Number of supply companies providing training 20 36 180%

13 Number of training sessions (Business????) 417 138 33%

DEMAND CREATION ACTIVITIES

14 # of demonstration plots established 600 1350 225%

15 Number of Agro dealers involved in demos and field days

200 707 354%

16 Number of field days shows and exhibitions 92 472 513%

17 Number of people participating in field days shows and exhibitions

78,200 154753 198%

18 Number of supply companies involved 25 36 144%

CREDIT GURANTEE

83

19 # Agro dealers supported by the scheme ????? 81 ?????

20 # Matching investments (start ups, add on, others) ???? 202 ????

84

7.7 Issues raised during MTR (Sept) 2010 and current status (Sept 2011) Midterm review issues raised Status at final evaluation

EACI

1 Introduce more specialized training on seed technology

Not possible to implement in the timeframe of the current project

2 Pass to present open announcements for potential PhD applicants

Not possible in the current project

3 Funding of short term training to assist MSc and PhD researchers

Not implemented

4 Limited transparency in the availability of grants to would be researchers

For future training initiatives

5 TOSCI and related institutions that support the seed system eg TPRI, plant breeders registration grossly underfunded

Situation remains the same

6 Effectiveness of Seed inspectors is limited due to participation in seed sales attracting sale of fake seed

Remains the same stages MTR

7 Agra needs to support TOSCI Not yet

FIACC 8 Breeding programs supported should be in line with

national priorities For all the breeding projects Approval of grants is by MAFSC officials who consider national priorities

9 Facilitate retired staff to mentor young breeders to impart knowledge and skills

Retired staff are hired under contracts and third actors consider this initiative

SEPA 10 Local firms have been slow in taking up role of seed

production and marketing Supported companies (5)?? are Slowly coming up e.g. Dr. Lyimo but seed deficiency is still high role of as a still significant

11 Confinement of seed companies to northern and southern zones => vast areas have no quality seed

TASP has tried to address this in the expansion phase still but to a limited extent

12 TOSCI and related institutions that support the seed system e.g. TPRI, plant breeders registration grossly underfunded

Situation remains the same

13 Support to public seed agency to handle seed for orphan crops , foundation seed farms and maintenance of pre basic seed for hybrid varieties

No support as of yet

ADP 14 Limited staff to reach agro dealers in the expanding

areas and high staff turnover affects continuity Remains the same and some staff were leaving the project country director had left

15 Long administrative and protocols limiting speedy decision e.g. from AGRA Nairobi, CNFA USA, CNFA Nairobi and CNFA Tanzania to /TAGMARK

Agra Nairobi has been eliminated but perhaps too late and insignificant to make much impact

16 Harmonization of project activities with extension staff activities

No evidence of much change

17 Undefined exit strategy Most projects have built in some exit strategy though there is no evidence of lessons learned from AT Uganda and UNADA

18 Agro dealers are benefiting less from the credit guarantee scheme

Based on the reports there has been some improvements on this (see data). Capacity building had been undertaken to improve agro dealers capacity on this

19 Provide training to agro dealers on banking and loan servicing

Training on business undertaken

85

20 Establish financial grantees to large suppliers with whom many agro dealers work with

21 CNFA/TAGMARK work directly with agro dealers and very limited link to extension staff limiting impact

Check with the interview and progress report on role of extension staff

22 MTR questionnaire surveys showed that very few farmers use improved seed and most input shops are located in urban areas

Check terminal evaluation situation

OVERALL

AGRA should establish a coordination office to ensure that activities across individual projects /programmes are coordinated and known to all stakeholders

Situation has been rectified