Performance during XI Plan Period (2007-12)

NABARD Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd

i 

 

Evaluation Study of Central Sector Scheme for Venture Capital Assistance for Agri-Business Development: Performance during XI Plan Period (2007-12) A Study Report prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) Pvt Ltd. for the Small Farmer’s Agribusiness Consortium, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi Study team from NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. (NABCONS) Overall guidance: Shri G. R. Chintala, Chief General Manager & Principal, NABARD Staff , College, Lucknow Shri P.V.S. Suryakumar, General Manager, NABARD & Principal Consultant, NABCONS, New Delhi Team leader: T.K.Hazarika, Deputy General Manager Members: Shri Sadique Akhtar, Consultant Economist, NABCONS Shri Y.G.Milton, Consultant, NABCONS Shri S.S.Sarmah, Consultant, NABCONS    

ii 

 

Disclaimer

This document has been prepared by NABARD Consultancy Services

(NABCONS) Pvt. Ltd for the Small Farmers' Agri-Business Consortium

(SFAC), New Delhi based on the field study.

The views expressed in the report are advisory in nature. It does not represent

or reflect the policy or view of NABCONS/ National Bank for Agriculture &

Rural Development (NABARD). NABCONS/ NABARD accepts no financial

liability or any other liability whatsoever to anyone in using this report.

 

iii 

 

ContentAcknowledgement iv List of Abbreviations v List of Tables vii List of Figures viii Executive Summary ix-xvii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1 1.2 Salient Features of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme 3 1.3 Need for the Study 4 1.4 Terms of Reference 5

CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY 7 2.1 Sampling Design 7 2.2 Data Collection 11 2.3 Data Analysis 13 2.4 Study Team 14

CHAPTER 3 CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SCHEME DURING XI PLAN PERIOD

15

3.1 Overview 15 3.2 Spatial Distribution 16 3.3 Bank wise Distribution 20 3.4 Activity wise Distribution 23 3.5 Term Loan and Venture Capital Assistance 24

CHAPTER 4 STUDY OBSERVATIONS & FINDINGS 26 4.1 The Study Coverage 26 4.2 Sample Distribution by Type/ Legal Status of Units 26 4.3 Distribution of Sampled Units by Type of Activity 28 4.4 Nature and Size of Investment 28 4.5 Adequacy of Bank Credit for Capital Investment 29 4.6 Adequacy of VCA Support 30 4.7 Appraisal and Sanctioning Procedure of VCA 32 4.8 Delays in Commencement of Commercial Production 32 4.9 Knowledge and Awareness about the Scheme 34 4.10 Coverage of AEZ Districts 35 4.11 Capacity Building 35 4.12 Impact of implementation of Scheme 36

CHAPTER 5 POLICY ISSUES & IMPLICATIONS 41 CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION 44

6.1 Recommendation 44 6.2 Conclusion 49

Annexures I Profile of Sample Agri-business Units 51 Annexure II List of Sample Project Studied 89 Annexure III Questionnaire “A, B, &C” 97 Annexure IV Zone wise, State wise, Year wise Distribution of Sanctioned Projects 112 Annexure V Sanctioned Unit under VCAS by Activity 113 Annexure VI Proceeding of State Level Consultation Meets 114

iv 

 

Acknowledgements The Evaluation Study of Central Sector Scheme for Agri-Business Development through Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) was undertaken by NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. on behalf of Small Farmers’ Agribusiness Consortium (SFAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India covering the period of XI Five Year Plan, with a view to assessing the scheme’s impact and evaluating operational roles of various stakeholders, identifying constraints and bottlenecks and suggesting areas for improvement. NABCONS would like to offer special thanks to SFAC for their financial support to this study. We would also like to place on record our special gratitude to Shri Pravesh Sharma IAS , Managing Director, Small Farmers’Agri-Business Consortium for extending his supports, cooperation, and valuable suggestions during every stage of the study. We also thank Shri Ashok Pillai, the then Director, SFAC and Shri Dhruba Bhuyan, Project Coordinator, SFAC for their valuable inputs and contribution during the course of the study. We appreciate the cooperation given by Shri Sushil Kumar of SFAC in providing essential information and data on the VCA Scheme. The cooperation, support, valuable inputs and insights received from the following Senior Officials of NABCONS/NABARD and other distinguished persons in finalizing this study report, is gratefully acknowledged: Shri M.K. Mudgal, Chief Executive Officer, NABCONS, H.O. Mumbai Shri R.L.Jamuda, IAS Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha Shri B. M. Patnaik, General manager, NABARD, Odisha Regional Office, Bhubaneswar Dr. Amiya Sharma, Chief Executive Officer, Rashtriya Gramin Vikash Nidhi, Guwahati Shri S. Indirajith, Chairman, Gurgaon Gramin Bank, Gurgaon Shri Ved Prakash Yadav, CEO, Gurgaon District Central Cooperative Bank, Gurgaon The study team would like to thank all the promoters and agripreneurs of the sample units covered under the study in various states, Branch Managers of Financing Banks, State/District Level SFAC/ Govt. Officials and all participants in the two State Level Consultative Meets and Bankers Meeting held at Bhopal, Bhubaneswar and Guwahati respectively, for sparing their valuable time to provide necessary cooperation, information and various suggestions required for conducting the study and finalizing the report. The cooperation received from the Nodal Officers and Consultants of NABCONS and other Officers of various Regional Offices of NABARD in conducting the study, especially in data collection and compilation of preliminary study observations is also deeply acknowledged. The study team is thankful to Dr. A. K. Sood, AGM NABARD, Himachal Pradesh Regional Office, Shri B.D. Nayak, AGM, NABARD, Punjab R.O. for their support to the study by way of developing tools for data collection and support in structuring the draft report. The study would not have been completed successfully but for the best efforts put in by the staff attached to the Zonal Office of NABCONS, New Delhi who deserve our appreciation.

v 

 

ListofAbbreviations AEZ Agri Export Zone APEDA Agricultural & Processed Products Export Development Authority BLBC Block Level Bankers’ Committee CDB Coconut Development Board CII Confederation of Indian Industries DCC District Consultation Committee DDM District Development Manager DER Debt Equity Ratio DIC District Industries Centre DLRC District-Level Review Committee DPR Detailed Project Report FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FPO Fruit Product Order FPOs Farmer’s Producer Organization FYP Five Year Plan IDBI Industrial Development Bank of India IQF Individually Quick Frozen MAP Medicinal and Aromatic Plants MFP Minor Forest Produce MOA Ministry of Agriculture MOFPI Ministry of Food Processing Industries MOU Memorandum of Understanding MSME Micro Small and Medium Enterprises NABARD National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development NABCONS NABARD Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. NBFC Non Banking Finance Companies NCDC National Cooperative Development Corporation NEDFi North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd. NER North Eastern Region NHB National Horticulture Board NHM National Horticulture Mission NIAM National Institute of Agricultural Marketing NMPB National Medicinal Plants Board NOVOD National Oilseeds and Vegetable Oil Development Board NPA Non Performing Asset PDF Project Development Facility PLP Potential-linked Credit Plan PSC Project Scrutinizing Committee

vi 

 

RBI Reserve Bank of India RO Regional Office RoI Rate of Interest RRB Regional Rural Bank SBI State Bank of India SCDCC Standing Committee for DCC SFAC Small Farmers’ Agri-Business Consortium SIDBI Small Industries Development Bank of India SLBC State Level Bankers’ Committee TFO Total Financial Outlay TOR Terms of Reference VCA Venture Capital Assistance VCAS Venture Capital Assistance Scheme

vii 

 

ListofTablesTable

No.

Particulars Page

No.

Table 1.1 Progress of VCA Scheme during XI Five Year Plan Period (upto

31stMar 2012)

2

Table 2.1 State-Wise Distribution of Sample Projects 9

Table 2.2 Year-wise Distribution of Sample Projects 9

Table 3.1 Bank wise projects under VCAS 22

Table 3.2 Activity wise sanctioning of VCA during XI FYP 23

Table 3.3 Zone wise average of Term Loan, VCA and VCA unit 25

Table 4.1 Frequency distribution of units by size of investment 29

Table 4.2 Breakup of assistance received by sampled units under VCAS 29

Table 4.3 Frequency distribution of VCA relative to total project cost 31

 

viii 

 

ListofFiguresFigure No Particulars Page No.

Figure 2.1 Year wise distribution of Sample Projects 10

Figure 2.2 Activity wise distribution of Samples 11

Figure 3.1 Number of units versus sanctioned VC during XI FYP 15

Figure 3.2 State wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS 17

Figure 3.3 Region wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS 18

Figure 3.4 Region wise trend of VCA Sanctioned during XI FYP 19

Figure 3.5 Bank wise distribution of project sanctioned under VCAS 21

Figure 3.6 Activity wise percentage distribution of units sanctioned 23

Figure 3.7 Zone wise sanction & disbursement of VCA- XI FYP 24

Figure 4.1 Distribution of samples by legal status 27

Figure 4.2 Percentage distributions by type of legal status of sampled units 27

Figure 4.3 Activity wise distribution of Sampled Units 28

Figure 4.4 Share of assistance of total project cost 31

Figure 4.5 Location of agri-business units 37

Figure 4.6 Annual Incremental Income by types of farmers 39

ix 

 

ExecutiveSummaryA. The VCA scheme at a glance.

The Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Scheme for Agri-Business is the flagship scheme of

Small Farmers' Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of

India, aimed at promoting investment in agri-business sector by encouraging institutional and

private sector investments and linkages so as to ensure empowerment of farmers and

sustainable development of the agriculture sector in the country. The scheme, implemented

with the participation of nationalized Banks, SBI & Subsidiaries and the IDBI since 2005-06,

provides for interest free venture capital assistance for agri-entrepreneurs for establishing

agri-business units. The implementation of Venture Capital Assistance Scheme of SFAC

primarily has broader perspectives of addressing the issues of inequalities and deepening

poverty, and promoting economic growth through investments in agro based industries near

farm gate.

The broad objective of the VCA Scheme is to promote agri-entreprises for value additions to

agricultural and allied produce so that the small and marginal farmers get benefit out of it.

The specific objectives of the Scheme are: -

1. To facilitate setting up of agri-business ventures in close association with banks.

2. To catalyze private investments in setting up of agri-business projects and, thereby

providing assured market to producers for increasing rural income & employment.

3. To strengthen backward linkages of agri-business projects with producers.

4. To assist farmers, producer groups and agriculture graduates to enhance their

participation in value chain through Project Development Facility.

5. Arranging training, field visits, etc. of agripreneurs setting up identified agri-business

projects.

B. Evaluation Study by NABCONS.

NABCONS was assigned in November 2011 the evaluation study of VCA scheme of SFAC

implemented during the XI Five Year Plan, with the following terms of reference.

x 

 

1. The projects assisted by SFAC during the XI Plan period under Venture Capital

Assistance Scheme would be evaluated on purposive random sampling basis covering a

minimum of 10% of the total projects.

2. The Study would bring out the impact of implementation of the scheme with reference

to the various objectives such as, setting up of agribusiness units near the farm gates,

catalyzing private investment, strengthening of backward linkages, training of

stakeholders, utilization of PDF to encourage the progressive agripreneurs to involve in

value chain; arrangement with the Farmers/Farmer Groups and metamorphosis of small

farmers into agripreneurs.

3. To ascertain the trend in terms of regional spread, type / legal status of agripreneurs,

size of units assisted, etc. and to ascertain the reason for slow off take of the scheme in

certain regions/states of the country.

4. To study the timeliness in grounding of the project, identify the factors responsible for

timely / delay in commercial production.

5. To examine the issue of extending implementation of the Scheme through RRBs,

Cooperative Banks, NBFC, SIDBI, etc. and whether involvement of such agencies in

the past could have impacted the outreach of the scheme.

6. To examine in detail whether there is any need to link the VCA scheme to availability/

quantum of central/state govt. subsidy for any particular scheme/activity and to make

suitable variation of the quantum of VCA depending on availability of such subsidy

subject to a cap or upper limit.

7. To examine whether the SFAC can stand as guarantee for any entrepreneur/unit in order

to enable the latter to have better access to institutional credit, in the event of the latter’s

failure to bring forth adequate security / fulfill other eligibility for institutional

finance/credit support.

8. Review of/observations on the cap on project outlay and adequacy or otherwise of VCA

assistance amount.

9. To look into the adequacies, initiatives/interventions required for policy measures,

operational guidelines in respect of involvement of entrepreneurs and acceptability by

the banks for enhancing credit flow to the agribusiness projects.

10. Issues, if any observed, related to the avenues for the FPOs to grow and thrive.

xi 

 

C. Methodology

NABCONS devised suitable research design and methodology to conduct evaluation Study

and 41 units were shortlisted for detailed study. An effort has been made to collect relevant

data from selected units supported with VCA and also to gather information from other stake

holders e.g. financing banks and the farmers through appropriate research methods. The

study is based on analysis of both primary and secondary data collected from different

stakeholders of the project with a view to arrive at "accurate / nearest to accurate" level of

information to evaluate the impact of the Scheme. Besides this, state level meets were

organised with bankers, promotional organisations, select entrepreneurs etc. on behalf of

SFAC at Bhopal and Bhubaneswar, a meeting with bankers in Guwahati, visits to

RRB/Coop. Bank and a private Commercial Bank and desk scrutiny and consultations/

discussions with SFAC officials.

D. The Broad Findings of the Study: 1) During the XI Five Year Plan 409 units had been sanctioned VCA amounting to Rs.

120.17 crore as against a projected number of 325 thereby achieving 126% performance.

The average investment capital requirement of sample agribusiness units has been

Rs.544.98 lakh per unit and the average term loan extended to these units by financing

banks has been Rs.282.48 lakh (51.3%).

2) The VCA has played the role of a catalyst to bring in capital to the agribusiness sector

with its contribution on an average of Rs. 49.02 lakh (9.02% of the project cost) per unit.

The average equity investment in terms of margin money of the entrepreneur is about

Rs.168.85 lakh that accounts for 30.98% of the project cost. The entrepreneurs

acknowledged the support of VCA in implementing the units. The VCA Scheme has also

been successful in mobilizing private investment in agri-business sector. As regards the

PDF it is observed that only three units out of the sample units covered have availed this

facility which was the tune of Rs. 28.8 lakh.

3) However, the spread of assisted units has been uneven with Southern and Western

regions having shown very good performance, followed by the Northern region. The

performance in the NER states, Eastern states and Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgargh in

the central region is however far from satisfactory.

xii 

 

4) About 74% of the agribusiness units have been set up in rural areas and another 18% in

semi urban areas and remaining 8% in urban areas, catering to the raw materials

produced in hinterlands and creating both on-farm and off-farm employment

opportunities for the rural work force.

5) It was observed from the sample units visited that 37% of them were partnership

concerns, 37% private limited companies, 17% proprietorship concerns and the

remaining 9% are public limited companies and co-operative societies. Further, 50% of

the units pertain to horticulture, 13% IQF, 11% plantation crops and remaining in the

category of medicinal plants, fisheries and cold chain etc.

6) During the study it has been observed that all the units that have started commercial

production have been earning good income. The average annual income per unit of the

operating agribusiness units has been estimated to be Rs.202.26 lakh.

7) During the study it has been observed that on an average each unit has been procuring

raw materials from 25 villages in and around the unit through informal arrangements and

from 5 villages through formal arrangements.

8) It has been estimated, on the basis of the information collected from the farmers

benefited by the sample units that on an average 71% of the produce of the farmers are

being sold to the unit. Almost 97% of farmers in the vicinity believe that the units are

providing assured market to their produce.

9) The units have benefitted 43000 farmers through selling theirs produce and provided

gainful employment to 29000 families. The average employment per unit for the sample

projects is estimated at 121 persons during the peak season, while it recedes down to 8

persons in slack or off seasons. Each unit on an average engages 6 managerial/supervisor

cadre employee and 11 skilled labour while 104 are unskilled labourers.

10) On an average, 221 farmers provided raw materials to each agribusiness unit and mostly

in raw form. The raw materials are procured from villages within a radius of 78 kms on

an average. In most cases, the raw materials are procured from the hinterlands in around

30 km from the unit. In 58% cases, the units have made their own arrangements to

procure raw materials and also to provide to and fro transport facilities to the workers

engaged in the units.

11) The development of agribusiness units in rural areas has also induced ancillary activities

and other support services in the vicinity and created a driving force for economic

development of the regions concerned.

xiii 

 

12) Since, the projects have to be linked with a bank branch to avail term loan for grounding

of project and to be eligible for availing the VCA, the role of banks becomes crucial not

only in terms of extending the term loan and working capital requirement but also in

terms of bankers’ awareness and knowledge of the scheme. Presently the VCA scheme is

available through SBI and its associates, nationalised banks and the IDBI. During the XI

FYP, it was observed that 36 banks participated in the project and among others, SBI

and its associates financed 22% of the projects. The banks such as Regional Rural

Banks, Cooperative Banks and Private Sector Banks are not covered under the scheme.

It was observed during the field visit that the banks had taken due care as per the

prescribed norms while appraising the projects / sanction of term loan before forwarding

the VCA application to SFAC.

13) The knowledge and awareness of the scheme at branch level is not found to be

satisfactory. In 44% of the cases, the information of the scheme is available only at

Regional Office level. Since, Banks are the most important channel in promoting the

VCA this underlines the need for greater efforts by the Banks at block, district and state

level towards creating awareness of VCA Scheme

14) In 52% of the cases, the average number of days to get VCA sanctioned is more than 100

days. However, during the desk review it was observed that certain procedural changes

have been made during the last two years which resulted in reduction of time taken for

sanction to some extent. The introduction of Project Scrutinizing Committee Approach,

properly designed check list and format of application to be received from the banks has

enabled the process of preliminary scrutiny simpler and speedier. Yet there is a scope

and need to further streamline the process of scrutiny and sanction of VCA assistance.

15) There is not much awareness about the scheme among the beneficiary agripreneurs as

well; possibly because the whole work associated with VCA was attended by their

consultants. Many of the agripreneurs were not aware of the objectives of the scheme or

have only partial awareness of the objectives of the scheme.

16) Out of sample units studied, 14% are found to be located in notified Agri-export Zones.

17) The sample units have been processing the agricultural produce from an area covering

about 95976 acres and out of this, 14198 acres have been brought under the crops afresh

as crop diversification took place in these lands from other less remunerative crops. The

change in cropping pattern effect and the price effect has caused incremental income of

xiv 

 

Rs.20875 per acre on an average for the farmers supplying raw materials to the

agribusiness units.

E. Recommendations and Suggestions:

State/ Region wise Focus I. It would be advisable that SFAC undertakes a quick assessment to identify state / region

wise potential and even the pockets identified with specific agricultural produce, and then

begin with a system of annual internal projections (not targets) to assist the units. The

projections have to be arrived at in consistence with the other promotional efforts and be

made flexible vis-a-vis progress in promotional efforts and other ground realities and be

reviewed on a periodical basis.

Awareness Generation among Stakeholders II. In order to upscale the VCAS, it is necessary to create widespread awareness about the key

features and benefits of the Scheme among the various stakeholders. In this regard it is

recommended that SFAC may arrange to organise Bankers’ and other stake holders’

Meets from time to time; involve the SLBC Convenor and state level NABARD office and

major banks; and to see that VCA scheme is a part of the review procees at SLBC, DCC,

DLRC and other levels. Engagement of promotional organisations and a few entrepreneurs

in state level meets can enhance the process.

Covering new FIs/ Banks III. The SFAC may consider to involve RRBs, Coop. Banks and Private Commercial

Banks in the scheme and a beginning may be made with the RRBs. Similarly SFAC may

explore extending the scheme through more financial institutions e.g. SIDBI, NEDFi,

NCDC etc.

State SFACs IV. No state SFAC has sanctioned any VCA cases at their level, but, a couple of state SFACs

have, however, forwarded a good number of project proposals to central SFAC. The SFAC

should have a relook into the roles and responsibilities of the state SFACs. The SFACs

presence at state level needs to be stregthened with exclusive staff with undivided focus or

at least to give them annual programme of promotional activities and to monitor their

performance periodically.

xv 

 

Sanctioning System V. As has been understood, at present the entire proposal is examined in detail at SFAC level,

which in a way also involves re-examining what the financing bank has already examined

for sanction of term loan. This can result in avoidable delay. The process can be expedited,

if SFAC scrutiny commences with reference to the bank’s sanction order onwards. This

will help expedite the process of sanction and release. It is suggested that once the

requirements of preliminary scrutiny are met, the onward process of sanction should be

completed within 30 days. However, if and when the proposal is to be covered under the

suggested credit guarantee scheme and the SFAC becoming a major stake holder, a more

detailed scrutiny may be done and the pre-screening and sanction process may go upto 45

days.

Threshold Limit for Project Outlay VI. During the meetings with bankers and promotional organisations etc. organized by

NABCONS at Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Bhopal it transpired that there is a need to

suitably lower the present threshold limit of financial outlay on the project size.Such a

lowering of the threshold limit for project outlay assumes significance in particular, in

view of the 250 FPOs being promoted. The FPO units may require ancilliary infrastructure

such as sorting and grading units, storage facilities, mini dal mills, vegetable dehydration

units, vending units, kiosks etc. In tribal areas these could be rural godowns, wild honey

processes units, herbal and medicinal units etc. involving investment less than Rs.25.00

lakhs.The study therefore recommends that under the Venture Capital Scheme the

threshold limit could be reduced to Rs.10.00 lakh, for the units promoted by Farmer

Producer Organisations, NE and hilly States, Eastern States, Tribal Areas and in backward

areas. Threshold limit for others is recommended to be lowered to Rs.25.00 lakhs.While

adopting the lowering of the threshold limit, SFAC may either have to decentralize the

sanctioning and disbursal mechanism by involving partner financial institutions or will

have to expand its present organization setup to meet the huge demand that this move will

generate.

Quantum of VCA VII. The sampled units studied revealed that promoter’s contribution on average (including the

VCA amount) is 40% of the project cost which is considered to be on a higher side.

Further, the norms have to liberalised for the FPOs who may not have the adequate

xvi 

 

resources to the extent required towards the promotors contribution to avail the bank loans.

It is therefore recommended that VCA amount may be revised to 25% of the project cost

(provided the promoter’s equity is at least 15%) for the NER, Hilly states/ Eastern States/

Tribal areas/ Backward notified districts and FPOs with a ceiling of Rs. 100 lakh. For

other categories VCA could be 15 % of the project cost or 35% of the promoter’s equity or

Rs. 100 lakh, whichever is less.

Incentive to the Financing banks VIII. The banks partnering in the scheme have to incur additional expenditures in administering

the scheme till the VCA amount is fully repaid. It would therefore be advisable to have

some financial incentive, for the banks towards this, which will also encourage the banks

to promote the scheme. The matter has been given a further thought and it is recommended

that that there could be a provision for financial incentive to the financing banks.

Guarantee Cover IX. The SFAC is presently promoting 250 new FPOs and to be fully operational and

successful these units may face constraints of no big resources to offer as collateral for

bank loan, capital base to take up big units and lack of entrepreneurial experience etc. This

necessitates the requirement of special consideration and handholding to the FPOs.To

mitigate the likely problems of resource base for collateral and lack of enough

entrepreneurial experience, which may deter the financial institution from financing such

units, it will be necessary to have some sort of credit guarantee cover for the units set up

by the FPOs. This can be a 100% cover (as compared to 75% in the credit guarantee

scheme set up by the Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME),

Government of India and SIDBI. SFAC may consider making a cautious and small start

and after gaining some experience and in accordance with the nature and size of FPO

projects coming up, may gadually expand the cover. Further, the performance of the units

covered under the proposed cover may have to be monitored closely on a regular basis.

Scope of Activities.

X. SFAC may consider expanding the scope of activities for VCA facility. Specifically it

may consider including dairy activities and farmer oriented poultry units with total capital

outlay of, say, upto Rs. 500 lakh. SFAC may also study the VCF Scheme implemented

through NABARD for subsidizing interest component on portion of the bank loan as an

xvii 

 

incentive for prompt repayment, in view of present high rate of interest being borne by

VCA beneficiaries.

Coordination / Collaboration with NABARD, NHB, MoFPI etc XI. It will be helpful in refining and increasing the outreach of the VCA scheme of SFAC if

there is a regular coordination with Institutions / Ministries / Departments like NABARD,

NHB and MoFPI etc. to keep updated with their schemes and policy initiatives. However,

SFAC may not simply adopt the schemes of these institutions but maintain the identity of

its unique intervention of VCA.

********

1  

CHAPTER1 INTRODUCTION�

1.1 Background

Agriculture is the most important economic activity for about 70% of the population in

India employing more than half of the total work force. However, nearly seventy five percent of

total operational holding is small and marginal in nature which is spread to almost one fourth of

the total area. Majority of small and marginal farmers who cultivate on these lands grow mainly

low value, subsistence crops. Lack of adequate employment opportunities, both farm and off

farm they are forced to live below poverty line. Land being scarce resource, the situation is

expected to worsen because of growing population leading to further fragmentation which will

limit the scope of further increase of additional production through subsistence farming.

Out of several factors contributing to the present state of Indian agriculture, one

important reason is lack of adequate market and value additions to agricultural and allied

produce, which makes agriculture, a less attractive and low remunerative occupation for many in

rural India. Retention of rural population, especially the youth, in agriculture and their place of

domicile is also a challenge. In such a situation, there arises a need for diversification and

commercialization of small farms within and outside agriculture, such as capital investment in

value addition and marketing in the primary sector to ensure economic sustainability of small

and marginal farmers and establishing proper integration with domestic and global markets. This

is intended not only to bring the small and marginal farmers out of poverty trap but also to meet

the country’s growing demand for processed food products such as fruits, vegetables, milk and

its products, meat, fish, egg, etc. which is growing linearly with growing per capita income.

In addition to unsustainable land holdings and low productivity, post harvest loss to an

extent of upto 24% [conservative estimates] arising out of inadequate processing facilities is the

major weakness in development of overall agriculture in the country. Efforts to bring capital and

technology together for establishing agriculture based industries are seen as an opportunity not

only to absorb surplus labour and provide relief to the problem of large scale disguise

unemployment but also to establish efficient linkages between the producers and the consumers

which will increase producer’s share of consumer’s income.

2  

The agribusiness activity which spans pre-harvest/post harvest/ post-farm function,

including consolidation, storage, grading, packaging, transport, credit supply marketing,

processing, retailing, export, investing on infrastructure for such value addition shall definitely

provide a stimulus for boosting regional rural economy.

Also, farming being the single largest private sector economic activity in the country, the

growth potential in this key sector is immense in view of changes taking place in food

consumption and growing demand for high value processed products. Success in such endeavour

will require innovation and partnership

The Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Scheme of Small Farmers' Agri-Business

Consortium (SFAC) is a step forward to promote agri-business and agripreneurs that link to the

development of small and marginal farmers as well as contribute to the welfare of landless and

weaker section of village communities by providing them employment opportunities in locale.

SFAC has been extending interest free venture capital assistance to agri-entrepreneurs for

establishing agri-business units since 2005. During the XI Five Year Plan period (upto 31st

March, 2011) SFAC has sanctioned venture capital assistance of Rs.120.17 crore that resulted in

establishment of 409 agribusiness units, benefitting about 43,000 farmers through selling their

produce. These projects have also generated gainful employment opportunities for nearly 29,000

persons in rural areas. Year wise progress of VCA for the XI Plan Period is presented in table

1.1 below.

Table 1.1: Progress of VCA Scheme during XI Five Year Plan Period (upto 31stMar 2011)

Year Financial (Rs. in crore)

Physical (No.)

Total Project

Cost (Rs. in crore)

VCA (Rs. in crore)

Farmers Linked (No.)

Employment (No.)

Projected Achieved Projected Achieved

UB* 6.97 2007-08 15.64 19.51 65.00 68.00 179.06 19.51 7,827.00 4,820.002008-09 17.20 18.43 65.00 58.00 173.68 18.43 8,979.00 4,833.002009-10 16.24 20.34 65.00 77.00 260.47 20.34 4,828.00 5,932.002010-11 26.31 24.01 65.00 85.00 353.18 24.01 11,003.00 7,689.002011-12 36.30 37.88 65.00 121.00 290.48 37.88 10,210.00 5,690.00Grand Total 118.66 120.17 325.00 409.00 1,256.87 120.17 42,847.00 28,964.00

Source: SFAC *Unspent balance of X Plan Period.

3  

1.2 Salient Features of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme The prime components designed by SFAC under its Venture Capital Assistance Scheme

(VCAS) are its Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) to agri-business undertakings and its Project

Development Facility (PDF) to assist producer, producer groups/ organization, units in Agri-

Export Zones and agriculture graduates in preparation of economically viable Detailed Project

Report. The scheme also envisages single window approach in association of financing bank for

extending venture capital with term loan and working capital to agribusiness applicants. Once the

financing bank approves the qualified project, venture capital would be extended to the account

of applicant which is interest free and could be repaid back after completing the repayment of

term loan. Venture Capital extended as a soft loan is expected to supplement the financial gap

existing under means of finance with respect to cost of project. However, the VCA could be

availed subject to fulfillment of the following conditions:

i. The project should be in agriculture or allied sectors promptly in product which are

perishable in nature such as horticulture, floriculture, medicinal and aromatic plants,

minor forest produce (MFP), apiculture, and fisheries. The projects in dairy and poultry

sectors have been excluded.

ii. The project should be able to provide assured market to farmer/ producer groups i.e

catering the needs of supplier

iii. The project should create potential in terms of diversification of high value crop and

henceforth increase incomes both at the level of supplier and procurer, which in this case

could be an agri-business unit.

iv. Project should be viable in nature and should be accepted by bank for grant of term loan.

1.2.1 Objectives of VCA Scheme

The broad objective of the VCA Scheme is to promote agri-entreprises for value

additions to agricultural and allied produce such that the small and marginal farmers get benefit

out of it. The specific objectives of the Scheme are: -

i) To facilitate setting up of agri-business ventures in close association with banks.

4  

ii) To catalyze private investments in setting up of agri-business projects and, thereby

providing assured market to producers for increasing rural income & employment.

iii) To strengthen backward linkages of agri-business projects with producers.

iv) To assist farmers, producer groups and agriculture graduates to enhance their

participation in value chain through Project Development Facility.

v) Arranging training, field visits, etc. of agripreneurs setting up identified agri-business

projects.

1.2.2 Venture Capital Assistance (VCA) Component

Under VCA Scheme, SFAC provides equity support to qualifying projects on the

recommendations of the bank financing the project. This equity capital is repayable to SFAC

after the project has repaid the term loan to the financing bank as per the original repayment

schedule or earlier. The quantum of SFAC’s VCA depends on the project cost and is the lowest

of the following:

1. 10% of the total project cost assessed by the bank;

2. 26% of the project equity;

3. Rs.75.00 lakh

The ceiling of VCA differs and cap is more, provided the project is located in the North-Eastern

and Hilly States. In such a case the quantum of VCA could be the lowest of the following:

1. 25% of the total project cost assessed by the bank

2. 40% of the project equity

3. Rs 75 lakh whichever is the lowest

Apart from the above criteria, SFAC could also consider high VCA to deserving projects on

merit and/or to projects that are located in remote and backward notified districts, North Eastern

and Hilly States recommended by the State Agencies subject to maximum of Rs 3.00 crore

One mandatory provision for VCA is, the project seeking VCA from SFAC must be

credit linked and currently the financing institutions like the Nationalized Banks, SBI & its

subsidiaries and other commercial banks are eligible to recommend for VCA under the Scheme.

1.3 Need for the Study

The VCA scheme of SFAC has been operational since 2005 and performed quite well

during the XI Five Year Plan (2007-2012). Against a projection of extending VCA to 325

5  

projects during the XI Five Year Plan, SFAC has extended VCA to 409 projects thereby

achieving 126% of the projected numbers. From Table 1.1, it can be observed that physical

projections for each year of the five years plan have been successfully achieved.

However, a preliminary review of the progress of the scheme reveals that the take-off of

VCA has remained uneven across various states as well as different regions of the country.

While, the Scheme has been successful in achieving its objective of bringing in private

investment into agri-business and strengthening of backward linkages in the agriculture sector

during the XI Plan period, there are regions/states where the scheme has not penetrated to the

desired extent. For example, while there has been tremendous response for the VCA Scheme

from states in the western and southern region like that of Maharashtra, Kerala and Karnataka,

the same could hardly take off in several states in the northern and eastern region which include

states like Punjab and Haryana having tremendous potential for agri-business, and those others in

the eastern region viz. Orissa, West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, etc. . There is thus

a need to look into the reasons for very low off-take of the scheme in certain states as also its

spatial disparities across states and different regions of the country. Further, before entering the

XII Five Year Plan, it is equally pertinent to evaluate the progress effectiveness and impact of

the VCAS vis-a-vis the set objectives of the scheme with a view to carry out required policy

changes in the scope of activities, coverage of institutions, quantum of assistance and refinement

in the operational guidelines. Accordingly, SFAC has assigned the responsibility to NABCONS

to conduct an elaborate and comprehensive evaluation of the scheme with given Terms of

Reference.

1.4 Terms of Reference

The terms of reference of the study are as under:

a) The projects assisted by SFAC during the XI Plan period under VCAS would be evaluated

on purposive random sampling basis covering a minimum of 10% of the total projects.

b) The Study would bring out the impact of implementation of the scheme with reference to

the various objectives such as, setting up of agribusiness units near the farm gates,

catalyzing private investment, strengthening of backward linkages, training of stakeholders,

utilization of PDF to encourage the progressive agripreneurs to involve in value chain;

6  

arrangement with the Farmers/Farmer Groups and metamorphosis of small farmers into

agripreneurs.

c) To ascertain the trend in terms of regional spread, type / legal status of agripreneurs, size of

units assisted, etc. and to ascertain the reason for slow off-take of the scheme in certain

regions/states of the country.

d) To study the timeliness in grounding of the project, identify the factors responsible for

timely / delay in commercial production.

e) To examine the issues of extending implementation of the Scheme through RRBs,

Cooperative Banks, NBFC, SIDBI, etc. and whether involvement of such agencies in the

past could have impacted the outreach of the scheme.

f) To examine in detail whether there is any need to link the VCA scheme to availability/

quantum of central / state govt. subsidy for any particular scheme/activity and to make

suitable variation of the quantum of VCA depending on availability of such subsidy subject

to a cap or upper limit.

g) To examine whether the SFAC can stand as guarantee for any entrepreneur/unit in order to

enable the latter to have better access to institutional credit, in the event of the latter’s

failure to bring forth adequate security / fulfil other eligibility for institutional

finance/credit support.

h) Review of/ observations on the cap on project outlay and adequacy or otherwise of VCA

assistance amount.

i) To look into the adequacies, initiatives/interventions required for policy measures,

operational guidelines in respect of involvement of entrepreneurs and acceptability by the

banks for enhancing credit flow to the agribusiness projects.

j) Issues, if any observed, related to the avenues for the FPOs to grow and thrive.

7  

CHAPTER2RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY�

In order to evaluate the performance of the VCA Scheme, as required as per the Terms of

Reference, the study has undertaken a holistic approach to collect reliable data on select

parameters such as nature of business, investment, employment, procurement of raw materials,

production, impact of production activities on cropping pattern of farmers, value addition, main

saleable products, marketing cover and incremental income from the investment etc. as also to

cover as many stakeholders as possible viz., agriprenuers, farmers, bankers, SFAC / Govt.

officials, etc. with a view to arrive at the impact and to suggest measures, if any, for further

refinement of the Scheme. For this purpose, the study devised suitable research design to conduct

a comprehensive evaluation exercise across the country. In doing so, an effort has been made to

collect relevant data from selected sample units supported under VCAS and to gather

information from the stake holders through appropriate study tools.

2.1 Sampling Design

The study is based on analysis of both primary and secondary data collected from

different stakeholders of the scheme viz. beneficiary Agriprenuers, Farmers, Financing Banks,

State SFACs, and concerned Govt. officials with a view to arrive at an "accurate / nearest to

accurate" level of information to evaluate the performance of the Scheme implemented during

the XI plan period and suggest measures, if any, for further refinement of the Scheme and

strengthening operational procedures. Discussions were also held with other selected agencies

[non-participants in the scheme] such as SIDBI, National Horticulture Board, MOFPI, Regional

Rural Banks, Cooperative Banks, NBFCs, etc. to understand the peculiarities of the VCA scheme

relative to other similar operational schemes and identify factors that deter the VCA Scheme

from wider coverage.

2.1.1 Sample Selection

To conduct an in-depth study for arriving at results with respect to objectives of the

study, purposive stratified random sampling method was applied to select sample projects

8  

assisted under VCAS and Banks that provided term loan to the respective sample units. For

detailed analysis, 41 sample projects, spread across 13 states (Annexure-II) were selected for

conducting the detailed study. During the XI Five Year Plan Period, projects in as many as 25

states were supported under VCA Scheme. As a first step of sampling, the states have been

stratified into groups according to geographic regions. States having maximum number of

projects in respective region were identified for selection of project units. In the second step, the

projects in the selected states were grouped into broad categories based on their activities and

sample projects were selected from each and every major activity. From every major activity one

or two projects have been selected randomly for collection of primary information for in-depth

analysis under the study. Adequate care was taken in the sampling process to cover the spread of

selected projects across the country as well as over a cross section of activities so as to give

proper representation of regional and activity-wise spread of the agri-business units supported

under VCA Scheme. The identification of sample projects was primarily based on the following

criteria: -

i. Minimum 10% coverage of the population of VCA during XI FYP.

ii. Selection of sample projects from all geographic regions with concentration of projects

sanctioned with VCA.

iii. Coverage of all major categories of activities in selected States.

iv. Subject to the ceiling of 50% in each State, coverage of all geographical regions/Districts in

the State; and

v. Maintenance of balance between units with high levels of Venture Capital Assistance

(VCA), i.e., over Rs.25 lakh, and those with average levels.

2.1.2 Geographic Spread of Sample projects

The sample projects were found to be spread over 13 states, with a minimum of one

project from Haryana and with a maximum of five projects from Karnataka and Maharashtra

states. States from all geographic regions of the country were covered. Sample projects were

selected giving priority to include maximum categories/types of activities. The state-wise

distribution of sample projects has been given in Table 2.1.

9  

Table 2.1: State-Wise Distribution of Sample Projects

Sl No. State No of Sample Projects

1 Andhra Pradesh 4 2 Assam 3 3 Gujarat 2 4 Haryana 1 5 Himachal Pradesh 3 6 Jammu & Kashmir 4 7 Karnataka 5 8 Kerala 3 9 Maharashtra 5 10 Meghalaya 2 11 Tamil Nadu 4 12 Uttar Pradesh 2 13 Uttarakhand 3

Total 41

2.1.3 Year-wise Spread of Sample Projects

Since, the broad objective of the study is to assess the impact of projects supported under

the scheme during the XI Five Year Plan, sample units were selected from each year of the five

years Plan period. Table 2.1 portrays the year wise spread of sampled projects. It can be seen that

sampled projects constitute overall 10% of the total projects supported under the VCAS over the

XI Plan Period (2007-2012). The sample size for 2010-11 and 2011-12 is relatively low because

many projects supported during these two years were either not completed or not in operation

after completion for a period enough to yield stabilized benefits and hence not considered.

Table 2.2: Year-wise Distribution of Sample Projects

Year Total Units supported (No)

Sampled Units (No)

Sample Percent

2007-08 68 11 16% 2008-09 58 7 12% 2009-10 77 16 21% 2010-11 85 6 7% 2011-12 121 1 1% Total 409 41 10%

10  

Figure 2.1 below presents the percentage distribution of sample spread over each year of XI Plan

Period.

Figure 2.1 Year wise distribution of Sample Projects

2.1.4 Activity-wise Spread of Sample Projects

The principal activities among the units supported under VCAS during the XI FYP were

among categories belonging to horticulture such as pulp extraction from mangoes, processing

and extraction of wine from grapes, pineapple processing-jam and jelly production, vegetable

processing that includes both frozen food products with Individually Quick Frozen Technology

(IQF), dry fruits processing including kernel extraction from cashew, walnut, almonds, coconut

processing etc. While selecting the units based on the broad activities care was taken while

sampling so that every type of units should get a proper representation in the sampling along

with other activities such as cold storage, packaging and extraction and storage of medicines

from Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, fish processing and packaging, honey extraction and

processing, cut flower production, minor forest produce and export oriented units. Figure 2.2

below presents the distribution of sample based on the activities supported by VCAS and falling

under the study sample.

(2007‐08), 16%

(2008‐09), 12%

(2009‐10), 21%

(2010‐11), 7%

(2011‐12), 1%

11  

Figure 2.2 Activity wise distribution of Samples 2.2 Data Collection

Both primary data and secondary data were collected and analysed during the study to

arrive at desired conclusion with respect to specific objectives of the study. The secondary data

source is mainly SFAC, select web-sites pertaining to the MoAC, MoFPI, National Horticulture

Board, and SIDBI etc. Data collected from SFAC included, State-wise distribution of projects

assisted under the scheme and other associated details such as location, particulars of the

agripreneurs, types of commercial activities, names of the concerned financing Banks, and

quantum of VCA approved and released etc.

Primary data were collected through personal interview method by using structured

questionnaires developed in synergy with the objectives of the study – one each for use in the

course of interview with the agripreneurs/promoters, with the financing bank and with groups of

farmers. This was developed to ensure coverage of all the aspects during the proposed

discussions. The questionnaires were developed keeping in close view the core objectives of

field visits - verification/revalidation of the initial indicators and markers delineated during the

analyses of primary data with spotlight on realistically assessing the levels of actual achievement

of the two key objectives of the Scheme – generation of employment and increasing incomes for

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Vegetable Deydration & Packaging

Fruit Processing

Nuts Processing

Medicinal Extracts

Cold Storage

Aqua Culture

Honey Processing

Cut Flowers

13

11

7

3 32

1 1

Numbers

12  

the rural masses through backward linkages. The Questionnaires are enclosed as Annexure -II to

this Report.

Pre-visit discussions were held with SFAC’s top officials in New Delhi on the proposed

list of identified projects for the actual study, raison d'être for each query in the three sets of the

Questionnaires, visit programme to the 13 States. The List of the 41 projects for the visit and the

Questionnaires were approved by SFAC.

Field visits were conducted between December 2011 and January 2012 to the concerned

41 Projects in the 13 States for collection of primary/secondary data at the ground level through

formal interactions/discussions/direct personal interviews with the stakeholders - the nodal

agripreneurs, the financing bank and the farmers who have benefitted from the respective

projects. However, detailed information could be collected from 38 sample units only due to

non-availability of concerned promoters/agripreneurs of 3 selected units during visit by our field

teams to the concerned locations. Discussions were also held with Lead District Managers of the

concerned District and Technical/ Financial Consultants of the concerned SFAC assisted project

subject to their availability on the date of visit. Subsequently, Delphi technique was applied in

order to ascertain the accuracy of relevant data/information collected for the study.

Post-visit discussions were held by the District Development Managers (DDMs) of

NABARD posted in the concerned Districts on the following aspects:

i. Perception and understanding of the financing banks with regard to the objectives of the

Scheme and the role played by them in popularization and dovetailing of the Scheme

with regular financing of agrienterprises by them as priority sector lending under their

normal business operations.

ii. General level of awareness as well as responsiveness about the Scheme among bankers/

Lead Bank Officers/Lead District Managers of each covered District and the ways that

could be devised and grounded for enhancing the outreach and efficacy of the Scheme

deeper into the rural hinterland.

iii. General appraisal of the ground level credit flow from the financing agencies towards

rural farm/non-farm sectors in some sample districts, especially those having large

potential for food and agro-processing, value-addition sectors that normally have the

13  

maximum scope for backward linkages with the farmers in rural areas, and determining

the actual coverage of that potential by the real benefits of the Scheme.

iv. Informal perception/views of the local associations of agripreneurs such as Chamber of

Commerce and Industries, Multi Activity Cooperative Societies, active Farmers’ Clubs,

etc. on the possible areas where such backward linkages of the eligible units under the

scheme with the farmers in the rural areas could be possible. This also covered the ways

and means through which such formal/semi-formal entities could assist not only in

popularization and effective grounding of the scheme but also in further strengthening of

backward and forward (market support) linkages between the agri-enterprises and the

farming communities;

Independent reality check on the actual impact of the assisted projects, vis -à-vis the

intended objectives, based on the deductions and conclusions derived from the preceding stages

have been done with a view to minimize biases in data.

Evaluation of the extant operational guidelines of SFAC and an estimation of its ground

friendliness from the view point of the beneficiaries and other stakeholders like bankers and then

coming up with suggestions and desired modifications in the guidelines to make them more

effective.

State level workshops at three different regions, Bhubneshwar, Guwahati and Bhopal

were also conducted as a part of evaluation of VCAS implemented during the XI Plan Period

with objectives to obtain views and feedback on the scheme from various stakeholders such as

banks, government officials, and promoter organization. In addition, visits were also made to a

RRB, Cooperative Bank and Private Commercial Banks to gain their experiences and views on

VCAS.

2.3 Data Analysis

Data collected from both primary and secondary sources were tabulated in MS-Excel

spread sheets that facilitated analysis of data using statistical tools like tabular presentation,

graphical representation using pie diagrams and bar diagrams for the purpose of highlight

various aspects pertaining to the study. In addition to this, subjective data collected during the

14  

period of information gathering were also used and analysed to arrive at conclusion with respect

to the objective of the study.

2.4 Study Team

The study was conducted by a team of Officers drawn from NABCONS Head

Office/Regional Offices who have relevant expertise and experience. The overall team consisted

of two structures - state wise Field Teams that collected the field data and assessed individual

projects and a Core Team at NABCONS, Zonal Office, New Delhi which was in the charge of

planning, carrying out discussions with the Client i.e. SFAC, development of analytical tools,

finalization of questionnaires, writing of the reports and overall coordination. As for the field

teams, its constitution was in sync with the specific demands of the subject assignment and,

hence, were made multi-disciplinary in nature, comprising 2 Members – an Evaluation Expert

and one subject Expert viz. Horticulturist, Expert in Bio-Technology, Civil/Agricultural

Engineer, Expert in Food Processing etc., depending on the project(s) being identified for

evaluation in a particular state.

15  

CHAPTER3CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SCHEME

DURING XI PLAN PERIOD�

3.1 Overview

The efforts of SFAC towards promotion of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme have

been evenly focused and directed towards all the States of the country. This is well reflected in

the presence of State-level SFACs and Nodal Agencies in most of the States in India which are

directing their efforts on development of agri-business sector in the concerned States. The overall

progress of the scheme during XI Plan period is found to be excellent in so far as the physical

and financial achievements are concerned. During the period of 2007 to 2012, a total of 409 units

were sanctioned VCA against the projected 325 units thereby achieving 126% of total physical

projection. Similarly, as against a financial outlay of Rs. 118.66 crore, the total amount released

during the period as VCA had crossed Rs. 120 crore, thereby achieving more than 100% of the

projected outlay. Figure 3.1, indicates the growth pattern of agribusiness units during the plan

period both in physical and financial terms. The positive growth in number of units and VCA

availed; reflect the future demand of financial resources to be put in the sector and catalyze

agripreneurs private investor to take up activities under the agri-business sector.

Figure 3.1 Number of units versus sanctioned VC during XI FYP (2007-2012)

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12

VCA approved (in crore)

No of Ag‐Bus Units

Units (No) VCA Approved (in Crore)

16  

However, it has also been observed, that the response to the VCAS differed from region

to region and state to state, which might be the result of several external factors other than the

innate content and strength or weakness of the scheme itself. These factors could range from

geo-spatial location of the state, general agro-climatic condition, available infrastructure such as

power, water, market etc, availability of raw material to intrinsic entrepreneurial skills, interest

of native population and prevailing policy of the respective states towards agriculture and the

agri-business sector. Notwithstanding the critical influence of above mentioned factors on overall

performance of the Scheme in a particular state, a close examination of the distribution pattern of

the assisted projects reveals that there has been intra as well as inter-regional variations in

distribution of projects. In subsequent paragraphs, the distribution of projects and the probable

reasons for variations have been discussed.

3.2 Spatial Distribution

During the XI Five Year Plan, 3 states, viz. Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka

accounted for 52% of the total projects sanctioned with VCA, while 3 other states viz. Uttar

Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Kerala accounted for another 20% projects that were sanctioned

VCA. Out of 409 projects sanctioned with VCA during the entire plan period, 113 (28%)

projects were sanctioned in Maharashtra alone followed by 56 (14%) in Karnataka and 43 (11%)

in Tamil Nadu. This clearly indicates that more than 72% of the total projects sanctioned under

VCAS are located in six states, while the rest 28% are shared among the other 19 states. Figure

3.2 below presents the state wise distribution of projects in a descending order.

While analysing the data region wise, which is classified based on Reserve Bank of India

(RBI) guidelines, the spread of VC assisted projects is found to be concentrated mostly in South

and West Zone accounting for 67% of the total sanctioned projects approved during the XI Plan

Period. South Zone states which consist Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh

together accounts for 138 projects out of 409 which is 34% of the total sanctioned projects under

VCAS during XI Plan. West Zone (Maharashtra, Goa and Gujarat) stands second next to the

South Zone in terms of total number of projects assisted with a total of 135 projects which is

33% of the total projects. Similarly, in North Zone, a total of 106 (26%) projects were sanctioned

during the period. However, during the same period, the three remaining Zones viz. the North

East (Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Sikkim), East

17  

Zone (West Bengal, Orissa and Bihar) and Central Zone (Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh) have

been able to get approval of only 30 projects under VCAS, which is 7% of the total VC assisted

projects (Figure 3.2) during XI Plan.

Figure 3.2: State wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS (2007-2012)

The above confirms that there has been an uneven spread of VCA assisted projects across

different geographic regions of the country. The locational disadvantages in North Eastern

Region may be the deterrent for investments under agribusiness in the region. The takeoff of the

scheme is also far from satisfactory in the Eastern Zone states consisting of West Bengal, Orissa,

Bihar, and Jharkhand as well as the states in the Central Zone such as Madhya Pradesh and

Chhattisgarh where only 10 projects were sanctioned over the period of five years (2007-2012).

These states are primarily agriculture based states and have adequate investment potential for

agro-based industries. Slow off-take of the VCA scheme in these regions and states as compared

to other regions needs a separate and intensive study.

Distribution of projects within the regions over the five years of the XI Plan Period has

also remained skewed. For West and South Zone, the sanctioning of projects over five year has

remained more or less even. The North Zone has shown a growth trend, however maximum

number of projects (59) have been sanctioned during the 2011-12. In North East, maximum

projects (8) were sanctioned during the first year of XI FYP, which afterwards declined over the

113

56

43

32

24

24

21

15

14

12

9 11

7

4 4 3 4 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

18  

next four years of plan period. In the Central and Eastern regions only 5 and 4 projects were

sanctioned over five years of XI FYP and majority of which were sanctioned in the last year of

the FYP. No projects were sanctioned during the year 2008-09 and 2009-10 in East Zone States

namely West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand and Sikkim could not avail the support of VCA

during the stated period and only one project each during 2007-08, 2010-11 and three projects

during 2011-12 were sanctioned (Figure 3.3).

Figure 3.3: Region wise distribution of projects assisted under VCAS (2007-12)

State wise, region wise and year wise distribution of projects during the XI Five Year Plan

period is given in Annexure-IV.

West Zone, 135, 33%

South Zone, 138, 34%

North Zone, 106, 26%

North East, 20, 5%

Central Zone, 5, 1%

East Zone, 5, 1%

19  

Figure 3.4: Region wise trend of VCA Sanctioned during XI FYP (2007-12)

A close look into the intra-regional variation of projects distribution reveals that within

the region also the distribution of projects remained highly skewed. In North Zone, maximum 32

projects during the XI FYP were sanctioned for Uttar Pradesh and 28 of them were sanctioned

during 2011-12. The next state is Himachal Pradesh where 24 projects were sanctioned almost

evenly during the Plan Period. Punjab has remained at the bottom of the ladder with just 4

projects. Among other Northern Region states/UTs, Delhi and Chandigarh could not avail a

single project. States like Punjab and Haryana, despite being best performers in agriculture,

horticulture production and allied activities, could achieve VCA level of just 4 and 11 units only,

respectively. Even the off take in Jammu & Kashmir (with 14 units) is found to be far from

satisfactory when the performance is judged in terms of huge potential of the state in

horticulture, floriculture and dry fruit production and agro-processing.

Similarly, in the West Zone, Maharashtra remained the leading state with 113 projects

and sanctioning also took place more evenly during all the five years of XI FYP. Gujarat, which

is another good performer state (21projects), showed steady flow of projects during the first 3

years but slowed down during the remaining two years. Comparatively, in South Zone, all the

states which participated in availing VCA except Pondichery, has fair distribution of projects as

can be seen in table presented in Annexure-IV. The details of region wise, state wise and year

wise breakup of project sanctioned under VCAS can be seen in Annexure-IV.

2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12

West Zone 27 17 26 33 32

South Zone 23 27 31 36 21

North Zone 8 13 15 11 59

North East 8 1 4 3 4

Central Zone 1 0 1 1 2

East Zone 1 0 0 1 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Numbers

20  

3.3. Bank wise Distribution

One of the salient features of the VCAS is that, the project should be credit linked with

Nationalized Banks, State Bank of India and its subsidiaries and IDBI to obtain term loan and

become eligible for availing VCA. In view of above, the role of financing banks becomes crucial

during project appraisal for assessing the viability of project, extending term loan and

recommending to SFAC for VCA and finally to the success of the project. The awareness level

of Banks as well as Branch Managers about the VCA Scheme also becomes crucial because,

unless adequate information about the scheme is available with the financing bank branch, the

scheme may not be linked to the eligible agri-business enterprise. Even though, all scheduled

Commercial Banks are eligible under the scheme, as the data available (for XI FYP), 36 Banks

have participated in the scheme during the XI FYP (Table 3.1). Although, Regional Rural Banks

as such were not invited to participate in the scheme, the Uttar Bank Khetriya Gramin Bank in

West Bengal has financed one unit along with NABARD under co-finance mode. During the XI

FYP, 25 Scheduled Commercial Banks including the associate Banks of State Bank of India and

five other Banks like IDBI, SIDBI, EXIM Bank, and one Gramin Bank & NABARD (through

co-financing mode) participated across 25 states for grounding the VCAS. Among these banks,

State Bank of India, the largest Commercial Bank of the country emerged as the largest sponsor

of the projects under the Scheme sanctioning 54 (13%) projects followed by State Bank of

Maharashtra with 51 (12%) projects and Canara Bank with 42 (10%) projects (Table 3.1). The

State Bank of India and its five Associate Banks have sanctioned 20% of the total projects which

availed VCA during the XI FYP.

21  

Figure 3.5: Bank wise distribution of projects sanctioned under VCAS (2007-12)

The distribution of banks with respect to number of VCA projects sanctioned during the XI FYP (2007-12) is given in figure 3.5.

5451

42

3229

21 20

1513 12 12 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 6 6 6 5

3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

State Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra

Canara Bank

Bank of India

Punjab National Bank

Bank of Baroda

Syndicate Bank

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited

Union Bank of India

Indian Bank

IDBI B

ank

Orien

tal Bank of Commerce

Cen

tral Bank of India

Corporation Bank

State Bank of Patiala

United

 Bank of India

UCO Bank

Vijaya Bank

State Bank of Hyderabad

State Bank of Travancore

Den

a Bank

Allahabad

 Bank

State Bank of Saurashtra

Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

Andhra Bank

EXIM

 Bank

AXIS Bank

The Karnataka Bank 

The Lakshmi V

ilas Bank

EXIM

 Bank/State Bank of India

HDFC

 Bank

NABARD/Bank of India

NABARD/U

ttar Banga Kshetrya Gramin Bank

SIDBI/Syndicate Bank

SIDBI/Punjab National Bank

22  

Table 3.1: Bank wise projects under VCAS (2009-12)

Sl Name of Banks No of Projects Sanctioned

% of project sanctioned

1 State Bank of India 54 13.2%2 Bank of Maharashtra 51 12.5%3 Canara Bank 42 10.3%4 Bank of India 32 7.8%5 Punjab National Bank 29 7.1%6 Bank of Baroda 21 5.1%7 Syndicate Bank 20 4.9%8 The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Limited 15 3.7%9 Union Bank of India 13 3.2%

10 Indian Bank 12 2.9%11 IDBI Bank 12 2.9%12 Oriental Bank of Commerce 12 2.9%13 Central Bank of India 11 2.7%14 Corporation Bank 10 2.4%15 State Bank of Patiala 9 2.2%16 United Bank of India 8 2.0%17 UCO Bank 7 1.7%18 Vijaya Bank 6 1.5%19 State Bank of Hyderabad 6 1.5%20 State Bank of Travancore 6 1.5%21 Dena Bank 6 1.5%22 Allahabad Bank 5 1.2%23 State Bank of Saurashtra 3 0.7%24 Indian Overseas Bank 3 0.7%25 State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur 3 0.7%26 Andhra Bank 2 0.5%27 EXIM Bank 2 0.5%28 AXIS Bank 1 0.2%29 The Karnataka Bank 1 0.2%30 The Lakshmi Vilas Bank 1 0.2%31 EXIM Bank/State Bank of India 1 0.2%32 HDFC Bank 1 0.2%33 NABARD/Bank of India 1 0.2%34 NABARD/Uttar Banga Kshetrya Gramin Bank 1 0.2%35 SIDBI/Syndicate Bank 1 0.2%36 SIDBI/Punjab National Bank 1 0.2%

Total 409 100%

23  

3.4: Activity wise Distribution

During the XI FYP under VCAS, total of 409 units were sanctioned VCA. Different form

of activities have been taken by the agri-business units which were sanctioned VCA. This on

dividing falls mainly on broad categories such as Food/ Fruit Processing, Cold Chain, Medicinal

value addition, Green House, Winery, Aquaculture, Plantation and Vermicompost. The data

revealed that around 64% (260) of the units sanctioned VCA were those of Food/ Fruit

Processing. Around 21% (87) of the total units were Cold Chain followed by 6% (24) Medicinal

value chain establishments (Table 3.3, Figure 3.6).

Table 3.2: Activity wise sanctioning of VCA during XI FYP (2007-12)

Broad Activities No of Units Sanctioned Percentage

Food/ Fruit Processing 260 63.57% Cold Chain 87 21.27% Medicinal Value 24 5.87% Green House/Floriculture 20 4.89% Winery 7 1.71% Aquaculture 7 1.71% Plantation 3 0.73% Vermicompost 1 0.24%

Total 409 100.00%

A detailed list of sanctioned units, activity wise, is attached in Annexure-V.

Figure 3.6: Activity wise percentage distribution of units sanctioned

Food/ Fruit Processing

63%

Cold Chain21%

Medicinal Value6%

Green House/Floriculture

5%

Winery2%

Aquaculture2%

Plantation1%

24  

3.5 Term Loan and Venture Capital Assistance

Total of 25 states across the country during the XI FYP availed the VCA. The total 409

agri-business units were established during the period with total sanctioned VCA worth Rs

120.17 crore. The analysis of zone wise sanction and disbursement of VCA revealed that the

West Zone consisting of 3 states viz. Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa availed the highest VCA

during the period with average of Rs 943.86 lakh per state. On an average each unit established

during the period availed VCA of Rs 23.02 lakh in the West Zone. Similarly, South Zone

consisting of 4 states Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh availed VCA worth Rs

933.53 lakh on an average. The average VCA per unit is Rs 29.4 lakh within the Zone. The

Eastern Zone remained the most deprived availing the VCA of Rs 23.62 lakh on average, which

is significantly different from other zones. Even the average VCA availed per unit in the Eastern

Zone is found to be the lowest with Rs 17.72 lakh (Figure 3.7, Table 3.3).

Figure 3.7: Zone wise sanction & disbursement of VCA- XI FYP (2007-2012)

The data also revealed that per unit disbursement of VCA is found to be highest in North

Zone followed by Central Zone with total value of Rs 36.36 lakh and Rs 35.18 lakh respectively.

The details of average term loan, average VCA per state and average VCA per unit availed

during the XI Plan period has been given in table 3.3 below.

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

700.00

800.00

900.00

1000.00

West Zone South Zone

North Zone

North East Central Zone

East Zone

943.86 933.53

358.43

77.39 105.55

23.62

Average

 VCA/state (in lakh

)

25  

Table 3.3: Zone wise average of Term Loan, average VCA per state and VCA per unit (2007-2012)

Zone/ Region Units (No)

Average Term Loan

(in lakh)

Average VCA/state (in lakh)

Average VCA/ Unit (in lakh)

West Zone 123 5560.31 943.86 23.02 South Zone 127 5474.24 933.53 29.40 North Zone 69 1980.30 358.43 36.36 North East 16 271.21 77.39 24.19 Central Zone 3 721.60 105.55 35.18

East Zone 4 210.97 23.62 17.72 Note: The average term loan and average VCA shown in above table is based on the data available for 342 units

26  

CHAPTER4STUDY OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS�

4.1 The Study Coverage

As has already been pointed out in Chapter 2, the present study covers altogether 41

projects in 13 States across the country for collection of primary and secondary data at the

ground level through formal interactions/discussions/direct personal interviews with the

stakeholders of the select projects viz. the project promoters and agripreneurs, the financing

Bank and the farmers who have benefitted from the respective projects. The study team members

also interacted and held detailed discussions with various other stake holders of the scheme

which included the Top Management and Desk Officials of SFAC, officials of State

SFACs/Nodal Deptt.(s) of select states, select RRBs and Pvt. Banks, representatives of

Entrepreneurs’ and Farmers’ Associations etc., with a view to having a deeper understanding of

the operational and policy issues involved with the VCAS. Further, besides having a Bankers’

Meet at Guwahati, two State Level Consultative Meets were organized at Bhopal and

Bhubaneswar with a view to have wider interaction with various stakeholders and senior State

Govt. officials on key policy issues. The present chapter presents the detailed field observations

and findings of the study based on evaluation of the sample projects and our interactions and

discussions with major stakeholders.

4.2 Sample distribution by Type and Legal Status of Units

The distribution of sample by type of legal status of units is presented in figure 4.1 below. Out of

a total sample of 41, altogether 30 units were found to have been registered as Partnership and

Private Ltd Co, and rest are Proprietorship, Public Ltd. Co. and Cooperatives.

27  

Figure 4.1: Distribution of samples by legal status

It has been furthered observed that in terms of percentage, out of 41 units studied, 37% of them

have been registered as Private Ltd Companies and equally under Partnership; 17% of the

samples are under proprietorship, while the rest 9% are either Public Limited Cos. or

Cooperatives (Figure 4.2).

Figure 4.2: Percentage distribution by type of legal status of sample units.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Partnership Private Ltd Co Proprietorship Public Ltd Co Cooperative Society

15 15

7

3

1

Numbers

Legal Status

Partnership37%

Private Ltd Co37%

Proprietorship17%

Public Ltd Co7%

Cooperative Society2%

28  

4.3 Distribution of Sampled Units by Type of Activity

The sample also revealed that 50% of the total sample units pertain to horticulture based

processing, 13% Individually Quick Frozen (IQF) Category, 11% pertaining to industry engaged

in processing plantation crops and the remaining in the categories of medicinal, fisheries, and

cold chain. Figure 4.3 below gives the details of sampled units by their types of activities.

Figure 4.3: Activity wise distribution of Sample Units

This is evident from above that the distribution of sample units by type of activity, which

indicate predominance of activities such as horticulture, food and fruit processing, medicinal and

aromatic plants, cold chain, aquaculture, etc., are not significantly different from the sample

frame, as around 63% of the total industries assisted under VCAS are those of horticulture and

food processing, 6% of the industries processing MAP, 21% pertaining to value addition through

cold chain, 2% in aquaculture (Figure 3.6). Therefore, this is expected, when findings are

extrapolated at the level or sample frame, the observations and finding will be able to represent

the population.

4.4. Nature and Size of Investment

From the data it has been observed that VCA has played a catalytic role in bringing in

private capital for investment in agribusiness sector. Seventy one percent of the units which have

been provided VCA, have project cost less than or equal to Rs. 500 lakh. Only 13% of the

19

54 4

2 21 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 00

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Horticulture

IQF  Unit

Others

Plantation Crop

MAP

Fishery

Cold Chain

Apiculture

Floriculture

MFP

Sericulture

Organic Farm

Verm

icompost

Polyhouse

Green

 House

Numbers

29  

industries established were having project cost ranging above Rs. 500 lakh to Rs. 1000 lakh. Rest

16% of industries has a capital investment above Rs 1000 lakh.

Table 4.1: Frequency distribution of units by size of investment (N=38)

Total Project Cost (in Rs. lakh) Frequency

Cumulative Frequency Cumulative %

Upto 500 27 27 71% 501- 1000 5 32 84%

Above 1000 6 38 100%

The above directly implies that most of the units assisted under VCAS, as much as 71% were

having investment worth Rs 5 crore or less. While, 29% units have investments above 5 crore.

The above shows, how the SFAC has been able to support a wide range of units with varying

levels of investments and and has assisted them to come up successfully.

4.5: Adequacy of Bank Credit for Capital investment

As per relative guidelines under the VCAS, an agribusiness unit to be eligible for venture

capital assistance from SFAC, should avail the term loan from any of the Nationalized Scheduled

Commercial Banks, SBI and its Subsidiaries and the IDBI. The bank has to complete the

appraisal and then calculate and recommend the VCA to SFAC for disbursement. Except in two

cases, all the banks have accepted the total project cost as indicated in the DPR. The term loan

sanctioned to units ranged between a minimum of Rs 21.84 lakh to a maximum of Rs 2355.5

lakh with average of capital requirement of Rs 544.98 lakh. The average term loan extended to

these units by the financing banks has been Rs 282.48 lakh. The total capital requirement and

assistance extended in the form of term loan, borrowers’ margin, VCA and external assistance

from the studied sample are given in table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2: Breakup of assistance received by Sample Units under VCAS

(Amt. in Rs. lakh)

Particulars Project Cost

Term Loan Borrower’s Margin

VCA

External Assistance

Total 20709.22 10624.49 6416.17 1869.52 1800 Average 544.98 282.48 168.85 49.02 60

N 38 38 38 38 30

30  

Almost 78% of the units have also availed external assistance in the form of capital

subsidy from different sources such as Ministry of Food Processing Industries (MOFPI),

National Horticulture Board (NHB), Coconut Board, Agriculture & Processed Food Export

Development Authority (APEDA), District Industries Centre (DIC), National Horticulture

Mission (NHM) etc. The average assistance obtained from these agencies is worth Rs. 60 lakh

per unit (Table 4.2). In almost 50% of the cases, the assistance is extended by MOFPI followed

by NHB.

The average interest rate charged by Banks is found to be 13.5%. The maximum interest

rate is found to be 18.75% on the term loan extend by State Bank of India to Sri Venkateshwara

Agro Export Ltd in Karnataka. The minimum interest rate is found to have been charged by Axis

Bank in Maharashtra, in respect of loan extended to M/S BAFNA Exports Ltd., which stood at

9.5% p.a. The rate of interest (RoI) has been found to vary from case to case and bank to bank

which may be in coherence with the policy of financing banks. Some of the Banks were also

charging found to have charged floating rate of interest which vary over time, as per the

corporate decision of the Bank on RoI.

The Banks have also been found to allow moratorium period to the borrowing units,

which varied from minimum of 6 months to maximum of 18 months. In 34% of the cases

studied, the moratorium allowed was 12 months. The repayment period also ranged between 5

years to maximum of 12 years depending on the size of industry. In most cases, the repayment

period has been fixed as 7 years including the grace period. The repayment period has been fixed

by the financing banks primarily keeping in view the commercial production, capacity utilization

and the payback period of the unit.

4.6 Adequacy of VCA Support

VCA to the projects has been sanctioned on the basis of prescribed eligibility criteria of

the schme i.e. lowest of the three alternative options viz. 10% of the total project cost assessed by

the Bank or 26% of the project equity or Rs.75.00 lakh. The VCA extended in respect of sample

units ranged in between Rs 4.35 lakh (M/S Virgin Coconut Oil Manufacturing Unit, Kerala) to

maximum of Rs 399.5 lakh (M/S Vinken Labs, Tamil Nadu). In term of percentage, VCA ranged

between 4% to maximum of 25% of the total project cost accepted by bank. The frequency

distribution reflects that in 58% cases the VCA extended to units are less than 10%, however in

26% of cases the VCA exceeded 10% but remained below 15%. In rest 16% cases, the VCA has

31  

exceeded 15% of the total project cost out of which in 8% cases VCA sanctioned is greater than

20% of the cost.

Table 4.3: Frequency distribution of VCA relative to total project cost.

% of VCA extended relative to Project Cost Frequency

Cumulative Frequency Cumulative %

Less than 10% 22 22 58% 10.1-15% 10 32 84% 15.1-20% 3 35 92%

> 20% 3 38 100%

All the sample entrepreneurs have profusely acknowledged the support of VCA for establishing

the units. However, they have suggested that there may be an increase in the limits of VCA from

existing 10% of the project cost to at least 25% and that the cap of Rs.75 lakh may be removed.

As it is evident from figure table 4.2 above, VCA has played a role of a catalyst in bringing in

private investment in agri-business sector to an extent of 31% which in terms of equity capital is

worth Rs 169 lakh per unit. The average contribution of VCA is found to be Rs. 49.02 lakh per

establishment which is approximately 9.02% of the total project cost.

Figure 4.4: Share of assistance of total project cost.

The average equity capital in term of Borrower’s Margin money is found to be to the

extent of 31% of project cost which is considerably high by any standard and sometimes difficult

to be arranged by an entrepreneur. In addition, the entrepreneurs also have to manage operating

Term Loan, 51%

Borrowers Margin, 31%

VCA, 9%

External Assistance, 9%

32  

costs to commence commercial production. This in case of agro processing always remain high

owing to the need for maintaining stock of raw materials, which are generally available for a

short duration after its harvest. Thus a higher VCA may be required lowering proportion of

equity capital from entrepreneur, which in turn can be used by entrepreneur in meeting other

variable costs of unit.

4.7 Appraisal and Sanctioning Procedure of VCA

Most of the beneficiaries appreciated the sanctioning procedure of VCA by Central

SFAC, which was done quite expeditiously without any protracted correspondence or any need

to visit Delhi on several occasions. All had very high regards for the professional approach of

SFAC and its remarkable swiftness in sanctioning the VCA without any bureaucratic approach.

However, in six cases (15%) out of 38, it was found that the release of VCA took more than six

months time from the date of application. It would be beneficial for the units if the VCA is

released within a specific duration. The average time taken for release of VCA from the date of

application for VCA is estimated to be 122 days, which is slightly over four months. In 52%

cases the time taken to release the VCA was found to be more than 100 days, which is more than

3 months from the date of application. The process of releasing the VCA need be quickened and

a time frame, say within a maximum of 45 days (one and half months) from the date of

application, may be fixed for releasing the VCA

The appraisal process of VCA cases during the Plan period was reviewed on sample basis

which revealed that certain procedural changes made during the last two years of the period

under review resulted in considerable reduction of the time taken for sanction, as compared to

time taken for sanction and release of such cases during the earlier period. Introduction of the

Project Scrutinizing Committee (PSC) approach has helped expediting the preliminary scrutiny

of the proposals received.

4.8 Delays in Commencement of Commercial Production

There has been delay in commencement of commercial production in some of the cases

as observed from the sample. In respect of 6 cases, it has been observed that either the units

established have not yet started commercial production on the day of visit to the units or there

has been delay as compared to the time stipulated for such commencement. There were multiple

reasons for delays. A few specific cases are presented below:

33  

a. M/S Trout Fish Canning and Preservation - The delay in case of M/S Trout Fish

Canning and Preservation, Himachal Pradesh has been due to natural calamities such as

land slide and flood. The time gap from the date of application to release of VCA is also

found to be 122 days. Further, the time taken for obtaining proper and valid license for

running commercial production was also found to be very long, which delayed start of

commercial production.

b. M/S Sultan Agrotech, J&K - In this case, the delay has been mainly due to lack of proper

technical and economic appraisal of project which led to lowering the limits of sanctioned

amount which in turn created hindrance from both technical and economic point of view.

The unit could not avail the amount required for technical up-gradation as there was more

than 50% curtailment from the original cost of project. Later, further disbursement was also

stopped by the Bank after release of Rs. 155.8 lakh against the sanctioned limit of Rs

265.76 lakh. Further, an amount of Rs. 50 lakh capital subsidy obtained from MOFPI was

also adjusted towards the recovery of interest. The unit is yet to commence commercial

production even after four years of initial sanction of the project. This puts a serious

question mark on the procedure followed by bank as regards appraisal of project and

sanction & disbursement.

c. M/S Brahmaputra Forest Product (P) Ltd - The reason for delay in commencement of

production in respect of M/S Brahmaputra Forest Product (P) Ltd., Assam was found to be

failure of the machinery supplier to supply the machinery in time. Another reason was

reduction in subsidy which resulted in shortage of adequate fund for running the unit.

Against a proposed subsidy of Rs 87.5 lakh from DIC, which was also accounted for as

source of fund in the DPR, the actual amount limits of subsidy made available was only Rs.

52 lakh.

d. Vinkem Lab Pvt Ltd in Tamil Nadu - The process and time over run has resulted in cost-

over-run, which finally resulted in delay in commencement of production in respect of

Vinkem Lab Pvt Ltd in Tamil Nadu. Unable to import required machinery for production

and lack of timely clearance from USFDA delayed the whole process. The initial term loan

of Rs 2433 lakh later on got revised to Rs 3318 lakh where the interest portion had to be

recapitalized as term loan. This unit has also been released VCA worth Rs 399.5 lakh as

special case. The unit was expected to start production by February 2012.

34  

In all the cases referred above, inadequate investment capital and bank finance have

remained key to delay of commercial production. Once there is time overrun, cost overrun

becomes inevitable pushing the unit into debt trap. The initial capital investment therefore is of

paramount importance for successful grounding of a unit and VCA has been playing a crucial

role. There has been increasing demand unanimously by all the entrepreneurs for increasing the

contribution in form of VCA.

4.9 Knowledge and Awareness about the Scheme

The Central SFAC and State-level SFACs both have been making focused efforts for

creating adequate awareness about the VCAS throughout the country. MOUs have been also

been signed by the SFAC with Public Sector Banks in this regard and several “Interface with

Banks” have been held across the country, while periodical advertisements in newspapers are

also regularly brought out. Despite such efforts by SFAC, one aspect that has come out

uniformly during the field study was very low level of awareness among the bankers and the

Government Departments about the Scheme and its benefits to agri-business development. As

per the information collected from Bank branches, the detailed awareness and information was

available with only 57% of bank branches while in the remaining 43% cases, the information are

available only at Regional Office level or no information even at RO and Branch level. There

could be several reasons for such low level awareness at Bank Branch level, which include,

frequent shifting of the officers and staff of the banks at branch and regional levels, priority of

daily work over developmental issues, non-percolation of the information about the Scheme

from the Zonal or Regional levels of the Bank to its branches, non-involvement of the Lead Bank

or the Lead District Manager of the concerned Districts in the awareness campaign, lack of

proactive role on part of the Government Departments like Agriculture, Horticulture and District

Industries Centers (DICs) in the promotion of the Scheme or its implementation, non-availability

of the details of the Scheme in the local language at District levels, etc.

There is not much awareness about the Scheme among the beneficiary agripreneurs as

well, possibly because the whole work associated with VCA was attended by their Consultants

or Chartered Accountants. In fact, even at the time of the field visits for the present study, 16%

promoters stated that they did not know about the scheme and another 38% reported that they

only knew as to how much they had obtained interest-free loan from SFAC; they were not aware

35  

of the objectives of the Scheme or the basis on which the amount of assistance was worked out

as these facts were known only to their Consultants.

4.10 Coverage of AEZ Districts

With a view to promote agriculture export from the country and improve upon the

international competitiveness, the concept of agri-export zone (AEZ) was floated. These zones

have been set up for end to end development for export of specific product from geographically

contiguous area. The sample data indicates 14% of the units are located in the districts notified

under AEZ, it can be well justified that SFAC’s VCA scheme has played a significant

contributory role to achieve AEZ objectives. The total investment in AEZ locations is worked

out to be approximately 28% of the total investments of the sample units, which is to the tune of

Rs 4599 lakh. This is therefore no denying of the fact that the VCAS within a short period of its

existence has significantly contributed to the effective grounding of notified AEZs in the

country.

4.11 Capacity Building

One of the objectives of the scheme is also to enhance the skill and knowledge of

entrepreneurs through capacity building initiatives. The study reveals that only 42% of the

entrepreneurs have been imparted with skill development and capacity building initiatives and

60% of them expressed that the training helped them in managing the unit in a better way and

this has resulted in improvement in quantity and volume of production. However this training

has been imparted only at the level of enterprise itself, and not at the project level. The study

findings further revealed that capacity building initiatives have been taken up by only two of the

State Nodal Agencies, one in Himachal Pradesh and one in Assam. Other than that none of the

sampled units reported the conduct of any capacity building program by State Nodal Agency. To

bring in and maintain the motivation, enthusiasm and also to popularise the scheme, the State

Nodal Agency needs to actively participate in capacity building of entrepreneurs, their

employees and staffs and information dissemination of the scheme.

The skill analysis of agripreneurs clearly indicates that the most vulnerable to failure

among all categories of entrepreneurs are those who are neither formally trained nor held any

experience in handling any enterprise. They are found to be almost 20% of the sample

agripreneurs.

36  

4.12 Impact of the Scheme

The scheme is expected to have both direct and indirect impacts. Direct impact is seen in

areas such as catalyzing private investment to agri-business units, direct employment generation

by the unit, strengthening backward linkages of agri-business projects with producer, increased

return to units. The spillover effect is expected to generate indirect impacts in the form of crop

diversification, generate on-farm employment opportunities etc. These impacts with respect to

different indicators are presented below:

4.12 (a) Catalyzing Private Investment

The average investment requirement of sample agribusiness units has been Rs.544.98

lakh per unit and the average term loan extended per units by financing banks has been Rs.

282.48 lakh (i.e. 51% of total project). This shows that someway or other, the VCA has played

the role of a catalyst to fill in the shortfall in capital in the agribusiness sector with its

contribution on an average of Rs.49.02 lakh (9% of project cost) per unit. The average equity

investment of the entrepreneur is about Rs.168.85 lakh that accounts for 31% of the project cost.

It can therefore be concluded that, the VCAS has been successful in mobilizing huge private

investment in agribusiness sector to an extent of 31%.

4.12 (b) Setting up Agri-business Units near Farm Gate

VCA has definitely facilitated establishing agri-entreprises in rural areas near to the

production centres. About 74% of the agribusiness units have been set up in rural areas and

another 18% in semi urban areas and rest 8% in the urban area (Figure 4.5). These units have

been able to cater to raw materials produced in hinterlands and creating both on farm and off-

farm employment opportunities for the rural work force.

37  

Figure 4.5: Location of agri-business units

Further, development of agribusiness units in rural areas has also induced ancillary

activities and other support services in the vicinity and created a driving force for economic

development of the region.

4.12 (c) Strengthening backward linkages

Setting up of agri-business units has strengthened the backward linkages with producers.

The analysis of data also revealed that each unit on an average is procuring raw material from 25

villages, within an average radius of 78 kms. In most of the cases, it is observed that

procurements are happening within the radius of 30 kms. However, the mode of procuring raw

material generally remained informal in nature. On average, each unit is procuring raw material

under formal arrangements only from 5 villages out of 25 villages from which the unit normally

procures raw material. In other words, in percentage terms while 20% of villages in a cluste,

used to have formal arrangements for procurement of raw material by a sample unit, the rest 80%

villages supplied their produce to the unit without any formal agreement.

The raw material provides by the producers were mostly in raw form without any

processing involved at primary level. In 58% cases, the units made their own arrangements for

procurement and also provided to and fro transport facilities to the workers engaged in the units.

Thus, need based transport systems and development of roads to the hinterlands and interior

areas have also taken place.

Urban, 8%

Semi Urban, 18%

Rural, 74%

38  

These agribusiness units have provided assured market to the farmers for their produce,

whether they sell the produce directly or indirectly to the units. It has been estimated on the basis

of the information collected from the farmers benefited by the sample units that on an average

221 farmers are selling 71% of the produce to each unit. Almost 97% of farmers in the vicinity

of a sample unit believed that the units were providing assured market to their produce. In 31%

cases, the entire produce of the farmers were found to have been sold to the agribusiness units.

Establishment of agribusiness units also encouraged farmers in nearby villages to

diversify into high value crops. It is estimated that an area of around 14,000 acres has been

diversified with new crops which are being bought by the units. These produces range from fruits

and vegetable like peas, gherkin, capsicum, pine apple, to medicinal and aromatic plants, such as

Aloe Vera, Tapioca etc. The resultant changes viz. change in cropping pattern and more

remunerative prices for the produce, have resulted in per acre increase in farm income, which is

estimated at Rs. 20,875 for selected sample cases.

4.12 (d) Employment Generation

With establishment of new industries, the probability of generating new opportunity to

employment of local people also increases and so has happened with the Scheme. The Scheme

has been able to generate additional employment to both skilled and unskilled labour force. All

409 units assisted during the XI plan taken together have been able to provide a gainful

employment to around 29,000 people. On average, each unit has been able to provide

employment to about 121 persons during peak season. During the slack season, the figure used to

come down to minimum of 8 person per unit. The agribusiness units appeared to have benefitted

mostly the unskilled rural workforce. Almost 85% of the total workforce were those belonging to

the unskilled category, while about 9% were skilled; the rest 6% belonged to managerial and

supervisory categories.

4.12 (e): Increased Wage Rate

With increased employment opportunity, the wage rate has also gone up as observed

from the sampled data. Before establishment of units, the average daily wage rate was Rs. 56/-

which has increased by factor of 3 over the period to approximately Rs. 156 per day. This has

benefitted the most deprived category belonging to unskilled labour force in the vicinity of

agribusiness projects.

39  

4.12 (f) Incremental Income by type of farmer

The farmers who have found an assured market for their producers due to establishment

of new agribusiness units have immensely benefitted from the Scheme by way of receiving better

return by selling their produce to the units. An analysis was carried out to estimate the

incremental income pre and post project establishment for three different types of producers viz.

marginal producer (land holding less than 1 ha), small producer (1-2 ha) and producer with more

than 2 ha of land. It is found that the incremental income for a small farmer was to the extent of

48%, followed by a marginal farmer (28%) and other category i.e. farmer having land more than

2 ha (14%). This indicates that the scheme has been successful in meeting the objective of

benefitting the small and marginal farmers more than the large farmers and is certainly helpin in

addressing the issue of rural poverty to a great extent. Average level of incremental income for

each category of producer is given in figure 4.6 below.

Figure 4.6 Annual Incremental Income by types of Farmer.

4.12 (g) Incremental Income of Agripreneurs

An agribusiness unit, in principle, is a commercial venture and the entrepreneurs in this

sector invest their money, time and skill for putting in value addition to the locally available

resources with a view to earn maximum possible return.. During the study it has been observed

that 85% of the units have started the commercial production and are earning incremental

income. The average annual income per unit of the operating agribusiness units has been

estimated to be Rs.30.86 lakh after the establishment of units. The estimated average

22000.0

37656.3

6262.5

28762.5

59244.7

13674.0

82807.7

110178.6

11650.0

0.0

20000.0

40000.0

60000.0

80000.0

100000.0

120000.0

Before  After ChangeBefore  After ChangeBefore  After Change

Land holder < 2.5 acre Land holder (2.5‐5 acre)

Land holder (> 5acre)

Annual In

come

40  

incremental returns from VCA are almost 30%. This means a Re. 1 lakh worth VCA investment

has led to a return of almost Rs 30,000 in terms of total income to an agribusiness unit.

41  

CHAPTER5POLICY ISSUES & IMPLICATIONS�

The implementation of Venture Capital Assistance Scheme of SFAC has broader

perspectives of addressing inequalities and deepening poverty, especially at the national level

and realizing its importance due to international policies of liberalization, globalization and

marketization bringing in change in business environment in which the industries are operating.

Globally, over the period of time, inequalities and world poverty in the recent years has

increased rather than decreased, largely due to general global financial and economic crisis as

well as the food crisis felt by rising food prices even for essential commodities. This has caused

the agriculture development to become prominent again in development and poverty alleviation

agenda which has been brought to the forefront by various publications by World Bank (2008,

2009) followed by FAO and others (Agro-Industries for Development, 2009).

Looking into the agricultural scenario of India, coupled with low productivity, Indian

agriculture suffers from substantial wastage which differs from crop to crop. Nearly 10-15

percent of the grain and 20-25 percent of fruit and vegetables in India perish each year. This is

substantial in terms of quantum and also as percentage of national agriculture output. In a

country like India with 30-40 percent people living below poverty line, we certainly cannot

afford such a huge wastage. Systematic efforts are therefore needed to minimize wastage of farm

output and to encourage adoption of best practices and technology available that would cut down

processing loss. Efforts to improve quality and capacity of warehousing for grains and expansion

of cold storage facilities for fresh vegetables and fruits are at best a part answer.

Some of the hard fact related to agribusiness and small enterprises in India is that they

employ 90% of India’s workforce in approximately 29 million units and manufacture more than

6000 products ranging from apple juice to pickle. However, they receive a fraction, may be 10%

of the total loans. In addition, delayed payment by clients, climbing interest rates impact this

small business harshly. The implication of the above situation for the SFAC is perhaps how to

remain relevant to the context and face the challenge of assisting more and more agribusiness

and at the same time remain strong enough. The intervention designed in form of VCA and PDF

has found greater relevance to assist agripreneurs/ producer groups, supporting agribusiness

42  

units, however needs to move with greater impetus towards value chain establishment in which

its clients will operate. This will require all encompassing interventions along with adequate

resources to implement the program with support from different stakeholders such as Banks,

MOFPI, APEDA, NHB etc which have supported the scheme with their assistance to the extent

of 10% of the total project cost. The assistance is extended in the form of subsidy/ loans

carrying very low rate of interest and is mostly back ended. In other words, promoters of the

agri-business enterprises are expected to invest first and claim the subsidy later. While there is

no doubt that the support from these agencies, meets a considerable proportion of the project

cost, the promoter may still have to arrange fund from different sources to tide the time lag to

qualify for the release of subsidies. In many cases the capital subsidy is not made available by

banks even after release by the supporting agency and the promoters are forced to avail

unsecured loans which may attract very high rates of interest. It therefore depends on the

financial standing of the promoter or his ability to plough own funds in advance to be able to

avail the subsidy. The implication is that entrepreneurs, who can barely bring in their share of

the equity, are either are not able gather courage to invest in agri-business units or fail to take

advantage of the benefits provided by schemes.

Presently most of the units assisted by SFAC have availed subsidies from the following

agencies:

a. Ministry of food processing industries (MoFPI): The units involved in production of frozen

food, vegetable and fruit concentrates, ready to eat/serve food, snacks and pickles etc. have been

availing subsidy to the tune of 35-50% which works out to be the proportion of the costs towards

technical civil works and plant and machinery (with an upper ceiling based on the activity).

b. National Horticulture Board (NHB): Cold storages, pack houses, ripening chambers and

protected cultivation units for exotic fruits and vegetables and floriculture have been availing

back ended subsidy 25-40%(with an upper ceiling based on the activity).

c. Coconut Development Board: Units producing coconut oil, virgin coconut oil, vinegar, and

coconut desiccated powder have been availing subsidy to the tune of 20% of the project cost

(with an upper ceiling).

Other agencies that also support agribusiness projects in the horticulture sector are

National Horticulture Mission (NHM), Agriculture and Processed Food Products Export

43  

Development Agency (APEDA), National Fisheries Development Board and Marine Products

Export Development Authority for fisheries and National Bamboo Mission for bamboo products.

Private entrepreneurs with sound financial status have been able to avail benefits from

both SFAC for the venture capital assistance and the agency providing the subsidy and these

proposals are scrutinized by the two institutions separately. Therefore the decision for

considering venture capital may or may not affect the unit from getting grants and subsidies from

other agencies and vice versa. This is because while SFAC provides venture capital based on the

promoter's equity and the project cost, the subsidy is based on the cost of the technical civil

works and plant & machinery. In other words the criteria consideration for venture capital and

subsidy do not overlap. In view of this, SFAC and institutions providing grant/subsidy may not

work in tandem or in coordination. This situation may not affect current strata of entrepreneurs

assisted by SFAC (i.e. individuals/partnership firms, private companies) from availing benefits

from the two agencies; however farmer producer cooperatives/organizations/companies may not

be able to reap the benefits of both the agencies due to paucity of funds. In order to ensure that

maximum benefits reach Producer organizations, SFAC could consider extending financial cover

or bridge loan assistance (apart from venture capital assistance) to ensure that the preliminary

requirements of the agencies providing grants are fulfilled as well the unit being established by

them are not delayed for want of funds. This assistance could be interest free and repayable as

and when subsidy/grants are released by the agencies providing the same. The criteria for

assessing the bridge loan could be as per the amount of grant/subsidy sanctioned by the

institution and releases may be in proportion to the terms and conditions of release stipulated by

it.

44  

CHAPTER6RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSITON�

6.1 Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study, feedback and responses received from stakeholders of

the project during the course of the visit to sample units as also during the two state level Stake

Holders Meets and one Bankers meet, their objective analysis and subsequent collocation of core

and supplementary objectives of the scheme, suitable recommendations, with rationale for each

are derived, which are placed below. The suggestions and recommendations are intended to

strengthen the scheme in addressing major operational issues as well as issues relating to policy

guideline supporting the operational issues.

State/Region Wise Focus

I. As observed and the analysis revealed, the spatial distribution of the projects are mostly

concentrated in few of the states such as Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Also,

region wise analysis revealed that the performance of scheme is appreciable in regions such as

West and South compared to North East, East and Northern Region. These variations may

have arisen out of region and location specific comparative advantages and disadvantages,

prevailing policies relating to credit policies, agro-industrial development policies of states,

state of available infrastructure, availability of raw material etc. Therefore, it would be

advisable that SFAC undertakes a quick assessment to identify state/region wise potential and

even pocket with specific agriculture produce and then begin with system of annual internal

projections (not targets)to assist the units. The projections have to be arrived at in consistence

with the other promotional efforts and be made flexible vis-a-vis progress in promotional

efforts and other ground realities and be reviewed on a periodical basis.

Awareness Generation among Stakeholders

II. From the findings, this becomes obvious that lack of adequate knowledge and awareness of

the scheme among the stakeholders remained a major factor which have acted as a deterrent to

balanced regional spread of projects under VCAS as was expected. In 44% cases it has been

found that information regarding VCA is not available at bank branch level which is more

crucial frontline promoter of the scheme. In order to upscale the VCAS, it is necessary to

45  

create widespread awareness about the key features and benefits of the Scheme among the

various stakeholders. In this regard it is recommended that SFAC may arrange to organize

Bankers’ and other stake holders’ Meets from time to time; involve the SLBC Convenor and

state level NABARD office and major banks; and to see that VCA scheme is a part of the

review process at SLBC, DCC, DLRC and other levels. Engagement of promotional

organisations and a few entrepreneurs in state level meets can enhance the process.

Covering new FIs/ Banks

III. As per relative guidelines under VCAS, any project to avail VCA must be credit linked with a

Nationalised Scheduled Commercial Bank, SBI and their subsidiaries and the IDBI. Thus the

role of bank becomes crucial not only in terms of extending the term loan but also in terms of

bankers awareness and knowledge of the Scheme. During the XI Plan Period, as many as 36

Banks participated in scheme. The Banks such as Regional Rural Banks, Cooperative Banks

and Private Banks almost remained out of picture during period. Similarly Government

financial institutions such as Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI), North

Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd., (NEDFi), National Cooperative Development

Corporation, State Development Corporations etc. are actively promoting large number of

agribusiness units in rural areas and in the cooperative sector by extending loans. The units

assisted by these institutions have not been able to receive the support of venture capital from

SFAC as the VCA scheme can only be implemented through Nationalised banks and IDBI.

The SFAC may consider to involve RRBs, Coop. Banks and Private Commercial Banks in the

scheme and a beginning may be made with the RRBs. Similarly SFAC may explore extending

the scheme through more financial institutions e.g. SIDBI, NEDFi, NCDC etc.

State SFACs, Planning, Monitoring and Reporting

IV. No State SFACs have sanctioned any VCA cases at their level, but a couple of State SFACs

have, however, forwarded a good number of projects proposals to central SFAC. The SFAC

should have a relook into the roles and responsibilities of the state SFACs. The SFACs

presence at state level needs to be strengthened with exclusive staff with undivided focus or at

least to give them annual programme of promotional activities and to monitor their

performance periodically. This has come out during the State Level Consultation Workshop of

different Stakeholder organized on behalf of SFAC in Guwahati, Bhubneshwar and Bhopal,

that the divided attention among various schemes is somewhat hampering in achieving the

46  

scale. To take the scheme further effectively at faster rate, there is need to do proper planning

in consultation with banks, farmers and prospective entrepreneurs and organize

Entrepreneurship Development Program. The SFAC should also draw annual plan of work

and monitor the progress on regular intervals, may be quarterly. This could be done by

formalizing the progress reporting system and visits as well.

Sanctioning System

V. From the sample cases, delays have been observed in release of VCA in almost to 15% cases

with an average time lag of of 122 days. As was understood during scrutiny of appraisal

system, at present, the entire proposal is examined in detail at SFAC level, which in a way also

involves re-examining what the financing bank has already examined for sanction of term loan

which might have resulted in delay in sanctioning. The process can be expedited, if SFAC

scrutiny commences with reference to the bank’s sanction order onwards. This will help

expedite the process of sanction and release. It is suggested that once the requirement of

preliminary scrutiny are met, the onward process of sanction should be completed within 30

days. However, if and when the proposal is to be covered under the suggested credit guarantee

scheme and the SFAC becoming a major stake holder, a more detailed scrutiny may be done

and the pre-screening and sanction process may go upto 45 days.

The committee consisting of SFAC officials meets twice a month based on the pace of inflow

of the proposals, prima facie to scrutinize the proposals received keeping in view the

prescribed guidelines, to reject ineligible cases and to identify the gaps in the required

information from the applicants/banks if any, so that the same may be obtained quickly to

further processing of the eligible cases. The proposals cleared by the PSC would then be put

up to the Investment Committee consisting of the MD, representatives from NABARD, and

select PSU Banks which meets once in two /three months. Proposals which require higher

quantum of VCA more than their eligibility as per the stipulated norms and where there is a

need for a policy decision, the proposals are then referred to the Executive Committee chaired

by the Secretary, MoAC, GoI. Time taken for preparation of agenda notes for the internal

PSC/IC meetings may be reduced by resorting to well designed check list including

project/borrower profile.

47  

Threshold limit of Project Outlay

VI. During the meetings with bankers and promotional organisations etc. organized by

NABCONS at Bhubaneswar, Guwahati and Bhopal, it transpired that there is a need to

suitably lower the present threshold limit of financial outlay on the project size. Such a

lowering of the threshold limit for project outlay assumes significance in particular, in view of

the 250 Farmers’ Producer Organizations being promoted. The FPO units may require

ancilliary infrastructure such as sorting and grading units, storage facilities, mini dal mills,

vegetable dehydration units, vending units, kiosks etc. In tribal areas these could be rural

godowns, wild honey processes units, herbal and medicinal units etc. involving investment

less than Rs.25.00 lakh. The study therefore recommends that under the Venture Capital

Scheme the threshold limit could be reduced to Rs.10.00 lakh, for the units promoted by

FPOs, NE and hilly States, Eastern States, Tribal Areas and in backward areas. Threshold

limit for others is recommended to be lowered to Rs.25.00 lakhs. While adopting the lowering

of the threshold limit, SFAC may either have to decentralize the sanctioning and disbursal

mechanism by involving partner financial institutions or will have to expand its present

organization setup to meet the huge demand that this move will generate.

Quantum of VCA

VII. The sampled units studied revealed that promoter’s contribution on an average (including the

VCA amount) is 40% (31% Borrowers’ Margin & 9% VCA) of the project cost which is

considered to be on a higher side. Further, the norms have to liberalized for the FPOs who

may not have the adequate resources to the extent required towards the promoters contribution

to avail the bank loans. It is therefore recommended that VCA amount may be revised to 25%

of the project cost (provided the promoter’s equity is at least 15%) for the NER, Hilly states/

Eastern States/ Tribal areas/ Backward notified districts and FPOs with a ceiling of Rs. 100

lakhs. For other categories VCA could be 15 % of the project cost or 35% of the promoter’s

equity or Rs. 100 lakh, whichever is less.

Also, in a number of cases it was observed that while processing the applications the quantum

of VCA amount has been reduced on account of applying various parameters either at the

level of scrutiny or sanction. In this regard some of the project stakeholders interviewed

opined that such deduction has caused them operational difficulties at various fronts

especially in the absence of the reasons for the deduction. SFAC may consider

48  

communicating the reasons thereof so that the promoters may accordingly implement the

project.

Incentive to Financing Banks

VIII. The Banks partenering in the scheme have to incur additional expenditures in administering

the scheme till the VCA amount is fully repaid. It would therefore be advisable to have some

financial incentive, for the banks towards this, which will also encourage the banks to

promote the scheme. The matter has been given a further thought and it is recommended that

that there could be a provision for financial incentive to the financing banks.

Guarantee Cover

IX. The SFAC is presently promoting 250 new FPOs and to be fully operational and successful

these units may face constraints of no big resources to offer as collateral for bank loan, capital

base to take up big units and lack of entrepreneurial experience etc. This necessitates the

requirement of special consideration and handholding to the FPOs.To mitigate the likely

problems of resource base for collateral and lack of enough entrepreneurial experience, which

may deter the financial institution from financing such units, it will be necessary to have some

sort of credit guarantee cover for the units set up by the FPOs. This can be a 100% cover (as

compared to 75% in the credit guarantee scheme set up by the Ministry of Micro, Small &

Medium Enterprises (MSME), Government of India and SIDBI. SFAC may consider making

a cautious and small start and after gaining some experience and in accordance with the nature

and size of FPO projects coming up, may gadually expand the cover. Further, the performance

of the units covered under the proposed cover may have to be monitored closely on a regular

basis.

Scope of Activities

X. SFAC may consider expanding the scope of activities for VCA facility. Specifically, it may

consider including dairy activities and farmer oriented poultry units with total capital outlay

of, say, upto Rs. 500 lakh. SFAC may also study the VCF Scheme implemented through

NABARD for subsidizing interest component on portion of the bank loan as an incentive for

prompt repayment, in view of present high rate of interest being borne by VCA beneficiaries.

Co-ordination/Collaboration with NABARD, NHB, MoFPI etc.

XI. It will be helpful in refining and increasing the outreach of the VCA scheme of SFAC if there

is a regular coordination with Institutions / Ministries / Departments like NABARD, NHB and

49  

MoFPI etc. to keep updated with their schemes and policy initiatives. However, SFAC may

not simply adopt the schemes of these institutions but maintain the identity of its unique

intervention of VCA

Clarifying Operational Guideline

XII. As per para 3 A (j) of the Operational Guidelines, the venture capital is to be repaid to SFAC

in lump sum immediately or in four quarterly instalments together with the amount of interest

at the same rate as was applicable on the term loan of the lending bank. In this regard it was

gathered during the study that the banks sometimes increase the rate of interest on the term

loan during the tenure of the project period and insist that the beneficiary must pay the

enhanced rate of interest while opt for repayment in four instalments. SFAC may revisit this

aspect of the guidelines and the banks need to be advised suitably.

XIII. While issuing the sanction advice to the Banks it is indicated in para 2 as under: “In this

connection ……the funds received from SFAC will be credited to a separate account styled

‘SFAC a/c - xxxx (Beneficiary’s name)’ and released to the beneficiary for the project

implementation as and when required” as indicated in para 3 A (n) of the Operational

Guidelines. It is also indicated in para 3 A (i) that the venture capital would be in the nature of

soft loan, till the bank’s term loan is fully repaid and would automatically be converted into a

term loan. However, during the study it was observed that the banks were not clear about the

accounting procedure to be followed in regard to servicing of the VCA. This has resulted in

the case of Sach Herbotech Products, Sirsa, Haryana, where there is no accounting entry in the

bank’s books of accounts to the effect that the VCA amount is outstanding and to be repaid by

the beneficiary after repayment of the term loan. The VCA was credited to a current a/c on

receipt and the amount paid to the supplier of the plant and machinery with “nil” balance in

the account. This may lead to the risk of non- recovery of the VCA from the beneficiary by

the bank.

6.2 Conclusion

The SFAC’s VCA scheme has done exceptionally well as far as strengthening backward

linkages and creation of rural employment is concerned but its contribution to poverty reduction

was not clearly revealed. Its role in creation of rural infrastructure and catalysing private

investment into agribusiness and its successful role in ensuring better price for the small farmer’s

produce are strong justifications for extending the project to the XIIth Plan period. However

50  

changes in the policy guidelines particularly to ensure VCA is available to low investment

projects particularly those set up farmer collectives and also to bring on board more financial

institutions through which VCA could be routed, strengthening the operational guidelines need

to be undertaken. As per the findings of the sample units, the observations made during the

visits and opinions of different stakeholders of the Scheme, many of these units would have

never come into existence without SFAC’s VCA support.

51  

ANNEXURE‐IProfile of Sampled Agribusiness Units

Sri Tara Agrotech  

 

Location: Block: Kurnool Road, District: Prakasham, State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity 20000 coconut per day, 500 ltr of coconut water per day, 2 tons of coconut shell per day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

29 October, 2008

Financing Bank : Punjab National Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 252.10

Bank Loan – Term Loan WC

118.00 40.00

SFAC - VCA 63.00

Margin Money 71.10

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Plantation Virgin Coconut Oil, Low fat Desiccated Coconut Powder, Shell Charcoal

Brief description of Project performance:

The factory consists of 4 units viz. Oil extraction, Storage unit, Packing unit and Charcoal unit. The unit has started commercial production in 2008.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Preliminary processing of the de-husking is taken up by the farmers for which the farmers are paid and allowed to retain the husk for their additional income.

Provided employment to 20 persons from the rural areas. Major observations: Instead of the traditional extraction of oil from Copra, oil is extracted from

coconut milk through Centrifugal action to fetch higher prices and export potential.

Presently the produce is sold in generic form to large buyers and the unit is planning to develop its own brand for marketing.

52  

Srivarsha Food Products India Limited  

Location: Village: S.N. Puram, Block: Renigunta, Chittoor Road, District: Chittoor,State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity 19800 MT/P.A

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

12 February 2010

Financing Bank : Indian Overseas Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 1523.80

Bank Loan 1000.00 (enhanced to 1865.00)

SFAC - VCA 65.00

Margin Money 553.80

Subsidy from APEDA MoFPI

21.99 25.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Mango Pulp, Tomato Paste, Banana Paste, Papaya & Guva Juice

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is working to full capacity by collection of Alfanso, Thotapuri and Sindoori varieties of mango.

During slack season the unit is manufacturing Tomato paste, Banana Paste, Papaya Juice and Guava Juice for companies viz. M/s. Godrej, Parle, Pepsi, Nestle etc.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit covers 100 farmers informally for supply of raw material.

The farmers who were incurring loss on account of wastage in the absence of ripening chambers were benefitted due to setting up of the processing unit.

The unit provided employment to 70 persons permanently and seasonable employment about 500.

Major observations: The project was visited by SFAC during pre and post sanction period.

 

53  

Farm and Bio Natural Products  

Location: Village: 8-4-343/B/5, Viswakarmanagar, Block: Erragadda, District: Hyderabad, State: Andhra Pradesh

Plant Capacity 600 MTs

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

January 2009

Financing Bank : State Bank of Hyderabad

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 144.00 Bank Loan 66.00 SFAC - VCA 12.35 Margin Money 78.00 Subsidy Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture - Vegetable processing Sweet Corn, Baby Corn, Green Peas and Mushroom

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is working to full capacity. Green peas pods are processed during 2 months in the year while Sweet corn and Baby corn throughout the year.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

200 farmers are covered with informal arrangement. The unit has resulted in employment of 12 permanent

employees and indirect employment is significant. A fast food outlet is established to market the products. The farmers are benefited to the range of Rs. 25,000 to Rs.

27,000 per acre. Major observations: There was deviation from the DPR as the unit is not processing

vegetables such as Carrot, Cauliflower, Lettuce and Broccoli. The project was visited by SFAC during pre and post sanction

period.  

 

 

54  

Sri Samundeeswari Food Products Pvt Ltd

   

Location: Block: Vellore, District: Vellore, State: Tamil Nadu

Plant Capacity 5200 tons / year

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

06 June 2007

Financing Bank : Lakshmi Vilas Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 406.00

Bank Loan 289.00

SFAC - VCA 30.42

Margin Money 117.00

Subsidy from MoFPI 50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Mango Pulp and Other fruit pulp

Brief description of Project performance:

Commercial production has started after one year of installation. The unit presently processes 9,000 tonnes against the capacity of 20,000 tonnes of mango.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit has provided employment to 300 unskilled labours during peak season. The mango growers have got assured market and their income level has almost doubled. Increase in income has led to infrastructure development such as drip irrigation and proper maintenance of mango gardens and helped farmers children to go for higher education.

Major observations: Prompt repayment of term loan was observed. The additional investment of Rs. 2.5 crore for construction of covered drying yard, effluent treatment plant and removal of pulp with minimum wastage of 0.5%, packaging in air tight containers and adoption of latest technology for ripening of fruits to meet the requirement of the exporters.

55  

Vinkem Labs Pvt Ltd  

Location: Block: Annanagar,District: Chennai, State: Tamil Nadu

Plant Capacity Vinroelbine tartrate - 14000 gm, Vinblastine sulfate - 7000 gm Vincristine sulfate - 5000 gm

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

05 March, 2008

Financing Bank : Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate

the revised amount) Cost of the Project TFO 3260.00 (4731)

Bank Loan 2355.50 (3318) SFAC - VCA 399.50 Margin Money 850.00 (1413) Subsidy 32.46 Sector / Activity / Major products:

Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (API) - Vincristine, Vinblastine and Vinorelfine

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was earlier supplying the API to Dabur India. In 2008 when Dabur India stopped procurement. Instead of API in powder form the unit shifted to injectable product through modernization with revised project cost. The revised term loan was sanctioned in 2009. The project is yet to commence commercial production. It is expected to commence trial run of production in the first quarter of 2012.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

300 farmers who cultivated Vinca Rosea were benefitted and the processed products were exported to France and Belgium.

Major observations: The project is the unique one specializing in manufacture of anti-cancer drug using sophisticated technique. There was delay in opening up of buyer’s credit for the import of machinery and there was also improper planning on the part agripreneur as the applications for comfort letters were not issued on time. Due to delay in furnishing of required details sanction of additional term loan by the financing bank got delayed.

56  

Amman Food Products  

Location: Block: Dharmapuri, District: Dharmapuri, State: Tamil Nadu

Plant Capacity 1600 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

19 April, 2010

Financing Bank : Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Financial details: Cost of the Project TFO 86.37

Bank Loan 48.00

SFAC - VCA 7.80

Margin Money 26.89

Subsidy from MOFPI 18.72

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Mango Pulp and Tomato Puree

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is started commercial production and completed two seasons. Processing of mango for pulp and extraction of tomato puree was undertaken.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit has employed 150 persons during peak season. As there is no problem with regard to availability of raw material farmers have assured market for their products. The unit has been granting need based short term advances for the farmers without interest to carryout agricultural operations.

Major observations: No agreement between the unit and the farmers regarding supply of raw material. Neither the Bank nor the farmers were aware of VCA under the SFAC Scheme.

57  

Newgen Agro Processor Pvt Ltd  

Location: Block: Karuthamarampatty,District: Krishnagiri, State: Tamil Nadu Plant Capacity 10800 MT / P.A. Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

07 July 2011

Financing Bank : Corporation Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 1200.00

Bank Loan 820.00

SFAC - VCA 66.30

Margin Money 340.00

Subsidy from MoFPI 50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fruit processing Mango, Guava pulp

Brief description of Project performance

Commercial production is yet to start without trial run was completed during 2011 season.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit proposes to employ 10 skilled and 400 unskilled persons during 2012 season.

Major observations: There is no shortage of raw material and as the area is a mango belt. No agreement has so far with farmers.

 

58  

Venkateswara Agro Exports

Location: Block: Bellary, District: Bellary, State: Karnataka Plant Capacity 2500 MT per annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

01 July, 2009

Financing Bank : State Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 228.72

Bank Loan 80.00

SFAC - VCA 22.80

Margin Money 40.00

Subsidy State Government (S-21 value addition scheme)

26.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Gherkin, Chillies and Squash processing

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is selling around 3,000 to 4,000 MT Gherkin every year. Due to better price realization and regular orders the company is running profitably.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Around 30 technical staff from the company gives technical information to the farmers.

Financing of borewells is made by the company. Crop rotation takes place. 110 people get employment in peak season and 50 during slack season. Around 2,500 farmers from 30 villages are covered under formal contracts. About 1,000 acres are under cultivation of Gherkin. Level of income of farmers increased to Rs.20,000 to Rs.70,000.

Major observations: Company representative regularly visits the farmers to meet their technical and financial requirements.

The farmers wished to have continued relationship with the project.

59  

Indian Ambience Vineyards Pvt. Ltd  

Location: Block: Bidar, District: Bidar, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity 200000 liters per batch

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

09 December, 2009

Financing Bank : State Bank of Hyderabad

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 400.00

Bank Loan 200.00

SFAC - VCA 29.43

Margin Money

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Wine (pure Grapes)

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was first in the district and is in good condition. As the technology was new and imported there was delay in implementing the project. It is capable of producing export quality wine.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Agreement has been entered with 7 farmers. Delayed and non-payment by the company was reported by the

farmers. Major observations: Wine stock is piling up.

The management is not professional and not in the position to market the product in domestic and international market reportedly due to lack of funds to pay excise duty.

Due to pest attack and non-payment by the company some farmers have changed the crop.

There is need for bringing fresh equity and professional management team.

60  

Rico Winery Pvt. Ltd

 

Location: Village: Bijapur,Solapur Highway,Block: Kannal Post, District: Bijapur, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity 1.5 lakh liters / annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 March 2011

Financing Bank : Syndicate Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 408.48

Bank Loan 200.00

SFAC - VCA 23.54

Margin Money 133.16 (32.6%)

Subsidy from National Horticulture Mission

46.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Wine

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was first in the district to avail SFAC assistance. Due to prolonged paper work for import of machineries there was delay. The plant is in good condition and professionally managed.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

25 farmers have entered to formal contract with the unit. Assured market to the grape growers in and outside the Bijapur

district. Major observations: The company entered into MOU with another company for sale

of its products. The unit is having sophisticated machinery and has sufficient

storage capacity. As per the bank, the account is a standard account.

 

61  

Sri Ganesh Cashew Industries  

Location: Block: Udupi, District: Udupi, State: Karnatka - 576212

Plant Capacity 45 Qtls (60 Bags)

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

17 December, 2009

Financing Bank : Canara Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 120.00

Bank Loan 45.00

SFAC - VCA 10.48

Margin Money 45.00

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Cashew Kervels

Brief description of Project performance:

Started with the capacity to process 36 bags (27 Quintals) the unit has increased to 80 bags (60 Quintals).

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Assured maximum prevailing market price. Elimination of middle man. Provided employment to around 200-250 local youth.

Major observations: Formal agreement has been entered into with the farmers. The unit has grown in terms of its output.

 

 

62  

Sri Laxmi Devi Cashews

 

   

Location: Block: Mangalore, District: Dakshina Kannada, State: Karnataka

Plant Capacity 1125 tons/ annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

02 August, 2007

Financing Bank : Corporation Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 120.00

Bank Loan 56.00

SFAC - VCA 15.00

Margin Money 38.82

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Cashews

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was started with installed capacity to process 50 bags (3.5 tonnes) against which the present level of utilization 35 bags.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The farmers get assured market for their product without any preliminary processing of their produce.

VCA is reportedly reduced the interest burden. Provided employment opportunities to the rural people. The unit was a blessing to the farmers as there were no processing

unit in the vicinity. The farmers were able to get an increased price of Rs. 70-75 per kg.

The project eliminated middlemen in trading. Major observations: The entrepreneurs have adequate experience in the industry and the

unit is well managed. No formal agreement with the farmers.

63  

Banarasi Agro Fresh  

Location: Block: Kangra, District: Kangra, State: Himanchal Pradesh

Plant Capacity 3732 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

30 August, 2010

Financing Bank : State Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 276.35

Bank Loan 100.00

SFAC - VCA 22.14

Margin Money 116.71

Subsidy from MoFPI 37.50

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Capsicum, Cucumber, Broccoli and Tomato

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit step up in 2010 for preservation of fruits and vegetables was damaged by a flood and promoters are planning to shift the unit to the new location.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Before affected by a flood the unit could not reach its maximum potential / commercial operation though it had informal arrangement with 27 farmers in the project area.

Major observations: Presently around 10 people are working and it is expected that once the unit is shifted to the safer area it can employ more staff for its activities.

 

64  

Dev Bhumi Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd  

Location: Village: Matiana, Block: Theog,District: Shimla, State: Himachal Pradesh

Plant Capacity Deep Freeze Storage - 1000 MT, Controlled Atmoshpher - 100 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

NA

Financing Bank : Bank of Baroda

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 1140.00

Bank Loan 429.00

SFAC - VCA 59.28

Margin Money 651.72

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Cold Chain (Apple)

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has a capacity of 1,000 MT and an additional 1,000 MT is under construction.

Through informal arrangements unit gets its stock. Nature of benefits/ Impact:

On an average 75 persons are employed on contract basis. The farmers besides realizing higher income have reduction in

the cost of transportation of their produce to the unit which is in their vicinity.

Major observations: The unit tried to pursue the farmers for strawberry cultivation by giving their training and other inputs but the farmers were not inclined to take up the activity.

No training was given to Apple growers.  

65  

Trout Fish Canning & Preservation  

Location: Block: Manali, District: Kullu, State: Himanchal Pradesh Plant Capacity 1 Ton/day, 300 ton/annum Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

15 December, 2009

Financing Bank : Canara Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 271.23

Bank Loan 146.63

SFAC - VCA 36.76

Margin Money 84.85

Subsidy from MoFPI 56.78 

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fisheries Marketing of raw fish, tandoori fish, Biryani, smoked and fried fish

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has conducted the trial run for canning and processing of the harvested fish. Presently the unit is not carrying out any canning and processing activities because of damage in its structure due to land sliding and flood.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The project sources raw material such as feed and fingerlings from 40 local farmers under informal arrangement.

Major observations: The project area is not well connected with the cities. Marketing of finished products is a constraint hence the scope

of higher income is limited.  

66  

Sach Herbotech Products Private Limited

 

Location: Village: Nejia Khera, Bajekan-Nejia Khera Road,Block: Sirsa District: Sirsa,State: Haryana

Plant Capacity 2000 kg of aloe vera

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

11 November 2009

Financial details: Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 318.97 lakh

Bank Loan: Rs. 114 lakh

Financing Bank : Oriental Bank of Commerce

SFAC Assistance : Rs. 41 lakh

Margin Money : Rs. 86.97 lakh

Subsidy from MoFPI : Rs. 25 lakh

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Processing of Medicinal & Aromatic crops – processing and manufacturing of Aloevera products.

Brief description of Project performance:

The project unit has since been established and commercial production has started. The unit has graduated from proprietorship to a private limited company.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Setting up of the project unit in the rural area has resulted in crop diversification in the project area of in an around 50 Kms in Haryana and Rajasthan. About 105 acres sandy land has been brought under the cultivation of Aloevera. The farmers are able to get incremental income ranging from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs.35,000/- per harvest. However, in view of the limited supply of raw material the unit is presently not functioning to its maximum capacity installed.

Major observations: No accounting entry relating to the outstanding VCA amount is available in bank records as such the bank officials are unaware of their responsibilities to recover the VCA from the borrower and repay to SFAC. Under the circumstances, the borrower is free as and when the bank loan is repaid. This is a serious lapse on the part of the bank.

67  

Natural Green Food Products Pvt Ltd

Location: Block: Badaun, District: Badaun, State: Uttar Pradesh

Plant Capacity 1 MT per hour

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

01 December, 2008

Financial details: Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 946.2 lakh

Bank Loan: Rs. 400 lakh

Financing Bank : Canara Bank

SFAC Assistance : Rs. 75 lakh

Margin Money : Rs. 471.2 lakh

Subsidy from : Nil

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF processing Vegetable and Fruit

Brief description of Project performance:

Commercial production has successfully been undertaken.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The farmers have assured market and better price offered by the unit. This also eliminated Mandi Commission or brokerage. 30% to 40% increase in the annual income of the farmers. Resulted in the introduction of new crop namely sweet corn about 100 acres.

Major observations: Due to successful functioning of the unit one more unit has reportedly come up in the locality. 100 to 150 farmers have informal arrangement for supply of raw material to the units.

68  

Hi-Tech Natural Products (India) Ltd  

 

Location: Block: Beerakheri, District: Saharanpur, State: Uttar Pradesh

Plant Capacity 5400 MT / Year

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 December, 2008

Financing Bank : Oriental Bank of Commerce

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 262.00

Bank Loan 124.65

SFAC - VCA 49.01

Margin Money 62.50

Subsidy from National Horticulture Board

24.90 

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Apiculture Honey, Polleu, Propolis and Equipments

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit, besides honey extraction and processing, is also engaged in selling Bee colonies, Bee boxes, extractor, Bee-veil etc. The unit is doing well.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Unit has employed 100 persons. The company has trained 3,000 Bee keepers. The income level of the Bee keepers has gone up.

Major observations: The VCA was kept unutilized for 2 years at bank’s level and not released to the unit.

There was cost over-run and working capital requirement of the unit was not met by the bank.

69  

BAFNA Exports

 

Location: Village: Gate No. 468, Devi, Block: Daund, District: Pune, State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity Cold storage - 60 MT and pre-cooling - 8 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

28 February, 2008

Financing Bank : Axis Bank Ltd.

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 268.00

Bank Loan 135.00

SFAC - VCA 26.80

Margin Money 106.20

Subsidy from National Horticulture Board Maharashtra

24.45

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Fresh Grapes

Brief description of Project performance:

The grape garden owned by family members, relatives, friends of Agripreneur and other farmers. At the other side the unit also deals in export of Pomegranate which is sufficiently available in the area.

Banks in the District had specially appointed an officer of Manager rank to look after the demand for this sector.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The impact on rural employment by unit is not very significant as the unit requires a labour force of about 150 persons per season for 3 months.

Before the unit started, the farmers were forced to sell their produce at farm gate for the price of Rs 10-20 per kg. But now due assured market for quality product they have been able to get the price upto Rs 70 per kg.

Major observations: The unit deals with exports of grapes and pomegranate. After the unit is established, the farmers in the area have started growing exportable quality of grapes. However, due to prevailing economic crisis in Europe, the unit could not generate incremental income to the agripreneur.

70  

Parshva Food International  

Location: Village: At Bidgaon, Naka No.5 (B), Block: Tehsil Kamptee, District: Nagpur, State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity 2200 MT 

Date of Sanction of VCA by SFAC:

28 January 2011

Financing Bank : Bank of India Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 332.00

Bank Loan 175.00

SFAC - VCA 27.30

Margin Money 124.60

Subsidy from MoFPI 50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Mango Pulp, Pineapple Slice, Guava Pulp, Fruit Jam (Orange, Mango, Papaya), Awala, Karvand, Cashew and Tomato

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was established well within the time limit and commercial production was commenced in October, 2010.

Financing bank is satisfied with the performance of the unit. Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The Agripreneur income has increased about 50% after the establishment of the unit.

The unit has eliminated middlemen through direct purchase from famers and almost farmers from 65 villages are directly selling their produce to the unit.

Setting up of unit has provided assured market and stability in price of produce providing market, throughout the year.

The unit processed 275.22 MT finished product, of which 248.48 MT (90.3%) is exported and has earned foreign exchange to the extent of Rs. 56.02 lakh in the year 2010-11.

Major observations: The unit has not initiated any specific effort to establish backward linkages to acquire raw materials for its operations as the raw material is made available at the gate of the factory.

The requirement of raw material there is different fresh fruits has increased to great extent and farmers in the locality have felt the need for crop diversification.

Interest rate hiked from 12% p.a. to 14.5% p.a. which may affect the viability of project.

71  

Trimurti Foodtech Pvt. Ltd  

Location: Village: Nagar-Kalyan Road, Wadgaon Amli, Block: Parner, District: Ahmednagar, State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity 1200 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

29 October, 2008

Financing Bank : State Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the

revised amount) Cost of the Project TFO 851.33

Bank Loan 400.00

SFAC - VCA 84.60

Margin Money 316.73

Subsidy 50.00 (yet to be received)

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Frozen green peas, sweet corn, Frozen mango pulp, Guava pulp, Frozen mix vegetables, ready to eat snacks - Vada Pav, Veg. Burger, Punjabi Samosa, Pav Bhaji, Misal, French Fries etc.

Brief description of Project performance:

The project is started in the year 2004 as a private limited company and performing good enough to yield profit. The unit is generating an annual income of approximately Rs. 12 lakh. The unit is providing assured market for sweet corn and vegetables.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Generated employment for 400-500 people. Post project wage rate has gone upto Rs. 200 - Rs. 250 per day as against Rs. 50 per day. The acreage under crop has also gone up by 50-100% depending on crop. The income of marginal farmers has also increased to an extent of 75% from the produce sold to the unit. Since women are more employed at local level which has resulted increase in the family income.

Major observations: Cost of transportation is borne by unit. The support price of the product is mutually fixed in every season. If the market is high then the unit fixes quantity to be purchased from each farmer. The products left with farmer are directly sold to market by farmers themselves. Since there is no other unit in the area farmers are encouraged to tie up with the unit. The unit has also potential to increase its activities.

72  

VLSS Foods Pvt Ltd  

Location: Village: Plot No. 88, B.U. Bhandari Industrial Estate, Block: Sanaswadi, District: Pune,State: Maharashtra

Plant Capacity 1 MT per day

Date of receipt of VCA from SFAC:

04 May, 2009

Financing Bank : Indian Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate

the revised amount) Cost of the Project TFO 159.04

Bank Loan 55.00

SFAC - VCA 13.59

Margin Money 55.00

Subsidy 35.45 (yet to be received)

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Food and Fruit processing Mango juice / Pulp (ready to serve), Fig Spread Jam, Awla Drink and Mineral Water

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit was not setup on scientific lines though the promoters are sincere.

The unit was working for few months but presently not functioning. Till 30th November, 2011 the account was not an NPA.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations: No formal contracts with farmers, poor fund management, liquidity crunch, weak marketing were reportedly the reason for non-functioning of the unit.

The promoters need to bring in required additional funds. The plant and machinery need to be maintained in good condition

when the factory is not functioning. Proper marketing team need to be employed.

73  

Dara Enterprises  

 

Location: Village: Dara, Block: Harwan, District: Srinagar, State: Kashmir

Plant Capacity 1600 tonnes of walnuts / annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

16 April, 2008

Financing Bank : Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd.

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh (figures in parentheses indicate the

revised amount) Cost of the Project TFO 122.51

Bank Loan 40.80

SFAC - VCA 16.40

Margin Money 39.00

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand and aid

24.03

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Walnut Kernnels

Brief description of Project performance:

M/s. Dara Enterprises is a proprietorship engaged in Walnut processing and Almond processing. The unit was established in the year 2008-09. The unit has provided extension services in form of training and credit. The unit is performing well and generating profits.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: The unit could generate employment 110 people and the promoter has planned to upgrade the present unit which is expected to provide employment upto 500 people.

The Agripreneur income has been increased from Rs. 29,750/- to Rs. 46,000 after the establishment of the project.

On an average there is an increase in income by Rs. 3,500/- to marginal farmers and Rs. 12,000/- to small farmers.

Major observations: There is no formal agreement for purchase of raw material but farmers have revealed that very good backward linkages have been established by the promoter.

Department of Horticulture and Agriculture University (SKUAST) located near the unit are creating awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agri-business development.

Promoter and the bank were of the view of increasing the limit of VCA upto 50% which will reduce the loan burden of promoter.

74  

Kashur Doon Enterprises

Location: Block: I.G.C. Lassipora, District: Pulwama, State: Kashmir

Plant Capacity Walnuts, Kernels, Almonds, Kernels - 456000 Kgs

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

September, 2009

Financing Bank : Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd.

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 206.78

Bank Loan 45.00

SFAC - VCA 41.00

Margin Money 50.00

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand and aid 69.75

Sector / Activity / Major products: Horticulture Walnut kernnel and Almond.

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is established in partnership in the year 2010. The unit is operational and making profits. It has been procuring raw materials of nearly 40 farmers directly from 4 villages procuring 75-80% of their produce.

Because of the units established there has been increased in acreage under hybrid varieties of walnut and almond.

The unit has also provided training and credit services to the farmers. Nature of benefits/ Impact: The unit is providing employment to 30 people.

On an average there is increase in income of farmers by Rs. 10,500/-. The units profit has also increased by Rs. 20,000 per annum. Introduction of hybrid varieties of walnut and almond in the area. 95% of employees in the unit are women.

Major observations: There is no formal agreement for purchase of raw material but farmers have revealed that very good backward linkages have been established by the promoter.

Department of Horticulture and Agriculture University (SKUAST) is located near the unit are creating awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agri-business development.

The promoters have shown interest in benefitting women employees through formation of their self-help groups.

75  

Sultan Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd  

Location: Block: Food Park SIDCO Industrial Complex Khonmoh, District: Srinagar, State: Kashmir

Plant Capacity 80 tons / day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

11 September, 2009

Financing Bank : Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd.

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 755.66

Bank Loan 265.76

SFAC - VCA 88.90

Margin Money 91.00

Subsidy from MOFPI as a grand and aid

139.34

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Concentrates of Apple Apricot, Plum, Carrot, Peach and Pear

Brief description of Project performance:

The project has not been able to start as a result the impact of the implementation of the scheme could not be visualized.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations: The reason being the unit could not receive the full financial assistance seeked from different institution. Also, the bankers revealed that the promoter wanted the change in proposal for upgradation of unit by installation of latest machinery and technology after the project was already sanctioned. The permission to change the plan for other agencies like SFAC and MOFPI was made available. This led to a kind of deception in the mind of the banker on the intention of the promoter that delayed the grounding of project. Still no decision has been taken, venture as per project report submitted to bank or a revised project needs to be submitted.

76  

Vibrant Dehydro Foods Pvt Ltd

Location: Block: Mahuva, District: Bhavnagar, State: Gujarat

Plant Capacity 1600 MT per annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

21 July 2008

Financing Bank : Bank of Baroda

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 325.69

Bank Loan 140.40

SFAC - VCA 27.79

Margin Money 35.29

Subsidy from MoFPI 50.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Dehydrated Onion and Dehydrated Garlic

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is performing well enough to yield annual income worth Rs. 40-Rs. 50 lakh. As per the owner after the project the income has increased by Rs.10 lakh p.a. The unit is processing around 1600 MT of onions.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit has provided employment to 150 persons in which 30 are permanent while 120 are seasonal.

On average the income of farmers selling their produce to the unit has increased by Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- p.a.

The unit has created assured market for nearly 15000 MT of onions. The wage rate also increased to Rs. 150 person days.

Major observations: The unit also provides seed to farmers under the agreement of selling their produce to the unit.

The promoters are keen to see policy changes with respect to export of dehydrated onions and reducing import duty from western country.

 

77  

Amul Dehydration Pvt Ltd  

 

Location: Block: Mahuva, District: Bhavnagar, State: Gujarat

Plant Capacity 1200 MT per annum Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

07 April 2009

Financing Bank : Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 229.60 Bank Loan 100.80 SFAC - VCA 22.96 Margin Money 56.65

Subsidy 5% Interest subsidy from DIC

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Onion

Brief description of Project performance:

Prevailing terms and condition of VCA and its procedural aspects are helpful for smooth implementation of scheme.

There is no delay in commencement of commercial production by unit. Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit has generated additional employment for 25 persons. Wage rate increase by 25%. Increase in net profit of Amul Dehydration Unit by 17% (Rs. 4.31 lakh

per annum). There is approximately 20% incremental income to farmers due to net

saving in transportation. Major observations: VCA received to an extent of 25% proved helpful and adequate. The

procedural aspects of VCA proved helpful in smooth implementation of project.

The unit started in time and there was no delay in commencement of commercial production.

Transportation cost is borne by the unit and therefore farmers have net savings on cost of transportation.

78  

R K Frozen Food

Location: Block: Kashipur, District: Kashipur, State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity 3000 MT/annum ,300 MT/annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

-NA-

Financing Bank : Punjab National Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 900.00

Bank Loan 490.00

SFAC - VCA 48.28

Margin Money 225.00

Subsidy 292.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF processing unit Frozen Peas

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is in partnership started in the year 2009. However, the unit is not found to be working. The unit is located in Agi Economic Zone.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations: -NA-

 

79  

Samridhi Bio Energy Pvt Ltd

   

Location: Block: Udham Singh Nagar, District: Udham Singh Nagar, State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity 2.5 MT/hr.

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

01 February, 2010

Financing Bank : SIDBI

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 1350.00

Bank Loan 800.00

SFAC - VCA 73.06

Margin Money 454.00

Subsidy 400.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fruit processing Frozen fruit, vegetable, Canned fruit and vegetable

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is a private limited company started in the year 2010 financed by SIDBI. The unit is running in profit. The post project agripreneur’s income has also increased by Rs. 5 lakh.

Nature of benefits/ Impact: Income of farmers has increased by 25-30%. There is increased in acreage of vegetables like Peas, tomato, mustered leaf ranging between 10 to 100%. Provide assured market and better price. Almost 150 farmers started cultivating Peas in the area.

Major observations: The company has also provided seeds to the farmers. The VCA has helped bridging the resource gap, encourage setting up of project and facilitated higher production and better technology. The farmers who provided raw material in bulk are also reimbursed transportation cost.

80  

Gopal Foods  

Location: Village: Beriya Road,Block: Udham Singh Nagar, District: Udham Singh Nagar,State: Uttarakhand

Plant Capacity 2000 kg/hour of peas pods

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

28 January, 2010

Financing Bank : Oriental Bank of Commerce

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 919.25

Bank Loan 300.00

SFAC - VCA 58.65

Margin Money 229.81

Subsidy from MoFPI 399.50

Sector / Activity / Major products:

IQF Processing (Frozen Peas, Frozen Cauliflower and Frozen Carrot)

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is partnership established in the 2010. The unit is located in Agri-Export Zone. The unit is running under profit with expected income of around Rs. 20 lakh in the year 2011-12

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

There is expected increase in income of farmers by 25%.The unit has been able to provide employment to around 41 people in the unit. The wage rate has increased marginally by 10%. There is increase in the acreage under peas by around 2000 acres.

Major observations: -NA-

81  

Brahmaputra Forest products

 

Location: Block: Lakhimpur, District: Lakhimpur, State: Assam

Plant Capacity 1417500 sq. ft. per annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

-NA-

Financing Bank : Union Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 232.00

Bank Loan 64.50

SFAC - VCA 30.00

Margin Money 50.00

Subsidy 52.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Forest Products Bamboo Mates and Bamboo Corrugated sheet

Brief description of Project performance

The project has not been operationalized yet. Therefore, the performance of unit could not be discernible at this stage.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The project is yet to be operationalized after that it will be able to provide employment and enhance substantially rural income in the area through marketing of the new product.

Major observations: The credit flow from banks to agriculture sector was not so encouraging.

As per the survey two factors are responsible for the delay in commencement of commercial production. Non-receipt of entire committed amount of Rs. 87.5 lakh

subsidy in time. Only Rs. 52 lakh has been released by DIC. Inability of B. S. Engineering Co, Kolkata, to supply the

Pressure Machine in time.

82  

Madhu Food Product  

Location: Block: Lokra Chariali, District: Guwahati, State: Assam

Plant Capacity 310 MT

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

05 January, 2010

Financing Bank : United Commercial Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 200.00

Bank Loan 95.25

SFAC - VCA 29.75

Margin Money 75.05

Subsidy

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Food Processing Jam, Jelly, Pickle, Squash, Fruit Juice and Sauce

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is proprietorship and started commercial production, however the unit is not performing well enough as there is a problem of marketing of product.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Employment to approximately 15 persons as per the owner of unit.

Major observations: Funds received for the project appears not to be utilized exclusively for the project rather diverted a portion of it for construction of first floor for other purpose. The project appears to be sick one. Although, the entrepreneur claim increase in income of unit by 100% but infact this information seems not to be true. Even it become obvious from the observation that even rural income may not have increased.

83  

Sakshi Agro Beverages

 

Location: Block: Amingoan, District: Guwahati, State: Assam

Plant Capacity 2000 liter per hour

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

03 February, 2010

Financing Bank : Union Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. Lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 874.78

Bank Loan 583.00

SFAC - VCA 75.00

Margin Money 216.78

Subsidy Information not available.

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture Carbonated Fruit beverage prepared from fruits like mango, litchi, pineapple and orange.

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has started commercial production and VCA has a positive impact as it helped in bridging resource gap, encouraged setting up project, facilitated higher investment for production and promoted overall development of agribusiness unit. Credit flow from banks has remained smooth.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

There is slight increase in rural employment which has helped in enhancement of rural income.

There is also increase in wage rates and marginal increase in crop acreage is also observed.

General awareness among the farmers are created through State Agriculture and Block level officials about the benefits of agri-business development.

Major observations: The objectives of the scheme could be strengthened through extension by KVKs and local agriculture department which can encourage taking up crops such as pine apple and other horticulture crops.

84  

Megha Cashew Pvt Ltd  

 

Location: Village: EPIP,Block: Byrnihat, District: Byrnihat, State: Meghalaya

Plant Capacity 40 QT./ Day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

Not available.

Financing Bank : IDBI & EXIM Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 484.00

Bank Loan 189.00

SFAC - VCA 50.00

Margin Money 78.00

Subsidy from MoFPI 100.00

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Cashew Processing Processed Cashew, CSNL Liquid and Husk and Cake

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit is a Private Limited Company involved in cashew processing. This is the first industry of its kind.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The unit is ploughing back profits. The VCA has led to some positive impact in terms of helping entrepreneur for higher investment towards better production and better technology.

Major observations: There is some difficulty faced by the unit in procurement of raw material as it is mainly procured during rainy season which makes it difficult to sun dry leading to spoilage. The production is also observed to be falling down as farmers are switching to rubber due to incentive.

The receipt of VCA has taken more than 7 month from the date of application.

 

85  

K D Agro Industries  

Location: West Garo Hills, State: Meghalaya-794001

Plant Capacity 2120 MT/annum

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

2008

Financing Bank : State Bank of India

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 179.28

Bank Loan 40.79

SFAC - VCA 35.00

Margin Money 46.08

Subsidy from MoFPI 56.91

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Horticulture (Fruit Processing) Canned Pineapple slice, Pine apple pulp, green chilly and Pickle

Brief description of Project performance:

The company is of proprietorship type started in 2008. The project is prepared by SFAC notified consultant under PDF and Rs. 0.5 lakh was paid. The unit is setup because of the availability of raw material which provides scope to make profits. The project has also provided extension services in form of training and credit to more than 40 farmers.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

Though, there is no information available on exact area however, there has been expansion in area of cultivation under Pineapple.

There has been twice the increase in rates received by the farmers who are selling their produce to unit (from Rs. 200/tonn to Rs. 600/tonn.

The wage rate has also doubled from Rs. 60/day to Rs. 120/day.Major observations: -NA-

 

86  

Vittal AGRO Industries  

Location: District: Kasargod, State: Kerala

Plant Capacity 20 tons of coconuts/day (50000 nuts)

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

03 April, 2009

Financial details: Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 339.25 lakh

Bank Loan: Rs. 180 lakh

Financing Bank : Syndicate Bank

SFAC Assistance : Rs. 12.28 lakh

Margin Money : Rs. 84.50 lakh (25% of total cost)

Subsidy from Coconut Board : Rs. 50 lakh

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Coconut processing Desiccated Coconut Powder, by products Charcoal and Testa (Paring)

Brief description of Project performance:

There was no delay in commencement of commercial production. Though the project reported marginal loss during the first year now it is running in profits.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

In the absence of purchase tie-up no direct benefit accrued to SF/MF. However, the project has created employment for 120 workers majority are unskilled migrant labours.

Major observations: Though the project envisaged purchase of Coconut from identified marginal and small farmers in the locality in actual practice the purchases are made either from market are procured from traders.

87  

Kulanada Agricultural Marketing & Processing Co-operative Society Ltd

Location: District: Pathanamthitta - 689503, State: Kerala

Plant Capacity 5000 coconuts a day

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

13 July, 2010

Financial details: Cost of the Project TFO : Rs. 54.6 lakh

Bank Loan: Rs. 21.84 lakh

Financing Bank : SBI Pandalam

SFAC Assistance : Rs. 4.35 lakh

Margin Money : Rs. 32.76 lakh

Subsidy from :

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Virgin Coconut Oil, Coconut Pariugs and Coconut Viuelar

Brief description of Project performance:

The unit has not started commercial production though trial run was reported to have been conducted in June, 2011 by the society. All the equipments have been installed, power supply obtained and sale arrangements have also been made. However, production has not started due to want of working capital for which the society has applied to SBI.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

-NA-

Major observations: The amount of VCA was utilized for purchase of machinery. As the working capital requirement was not included in the proposal the unit faced the problem of fund constraint and commercial production not started.

 

 

88  

Kerala Aqua Ventures International Ltd

Location: District: Eranakulam - 683102, State: Kerala

Date of Sanction of VCA from SFAC:

31 November, 2010

Financing Bank : Canara Bank

Particulars Amount Rs. lakh

Cost of the Project TFO 1027.95

Bank Loan 155.45

SFAC - VCA 75.00

Promoters Equity / Share of Private Entrepreneurs 442.50

Government Share of Equity Government Grant

240.00 115.00 

Sector / Activity / Major products:

Fisheries Ornamental fishes

Brief description of Project performance:

Import of breeder stock of ornamental fish varieties with high market value multiply them locally through satellite units run by private entrepreneurs.

Nature of benefits/ Impact:

The employment pattern has been of the nature of direct and indirect employment. About 600 persons are reportedly engaged in the activity. It has also helped employment generation in the ancillary activities, such as production of fish feed, packaging and transportation.

Major observations: The homestead units visited have not reported having availed institutional credit though 150 units have been identified. 124 such units have received subsidy of Rs. 50,000/- each from NFDB.

The supply of seed materials is reported to be highly inadequate for the current and emerging requirements.

 

   

89  

ANNEXURE‐IIList of Sampled Projects Studied

Sno.  NAME OF PROMOTER 

ACTIVITY  CAPACITY  NAME OF PROJECT & ADDRESS 

CONTACT TEL NO 

DETAILS OF BANK                                         

Andhra Pradesh1  Sh. N.P.Madan 

Mohan Reddy, Mrs. N. Sridevi, Sh. N.P. Chandralekha and Sh. K. Prasad Reddy 

Manufacturing of herbal extracts and aromatic oils  

15000 kg/annum. 

Factory: Ground Floor, 75‐7‐26, Sri Amrutha Heights,Near Prakash Nagar Round Park, Rajahmundry ‐ 533103,Office: Excel Technologies (ET), Plot no. 148,. Sector‐8, MVP Colony, Visakhapatnam ‐ 530017.(A.P) 

0883‐2466660, 2466664, 2466665, 2466668, 09849338899, 9849130009 

SIDBI, 47‐15‐5, Gupta Building, II Floor, Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam ‐ 530 016 ‐Term Loan  Ph. 0891‐2540303, 6630313 Syndicate Bank, Rajahmundry Branch ‐ Working capital 

2  Smt. K.Rekha Reddy and Sh. K. Satynanarayana Reddy 

Processing sweet corn and baby corn and other English producing vegetables viz. Broccoli, Lettuce, Cauliflower, Peas etc. 

600 MTs  Office:  8‐4‐343/B/5, Vishwakarma  Nagar, Erragadda,  Hyderabad, Andhra  Pradesh. Factory:  3‐4‐343/B75, Vishwakarma  Industrial Estate,  Erragadda, Andhra Pradesh. 

040‐27761358  09394305006 

State Bank of Hyderabad, Commercial Branch, Surya  Towers,  Secunderbad‐03,Ph.  27841161  /  27846654,277020813 

3  Sh. T.V. Srinivasa Rao and Sh. D. Ramakrishna Reddy 

Integrated Coconut Processing Unit 

20000 coconut water  per day,  500  ltr of  coconut water  per day, 2 tons of coconut  shell per day 

Office:  G1,  Tip  Top Towers,  Opp.  Power Office  Road,  NGO Colony,  Ongole  ‐ 523002  Factory:  Plot  No.  244, 245  APIIC,  Growth Center,  Gundlapalli  ‐ 523211  Maddipadu Mandal,  Parkasam Dist., Andhra Pradesh 

08592‐282366, 9246463118, 9246461666, 9246191999 

Punjab National Bank, Ongole Branch, Andhra  Pradesh  

4  Shri K. Viswanada Naidu, Shri r. Sivaji Rao and Shri V. Umapathy 

Fruit  Pulp Manufacturing unit  of  especially mango pulp 

19800 MT/P.A. 

Office: 19‐3‐13/9, 4th Floor, Ramanuja Circle, Tiruchanoor Road, Chittoor Dist., Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh‐517501Factory: S.N. Puram, Puttur Road, Renigunta Chittor DistrictAndhra Pradesh ‐ 517 520 

0877‐2227304, 2221298, 09490777935 

Indian Overseas Bank, Tirupathi Branch, 630, V.V. Mahal  road, Tirupathi  ‐ 512501, Andhra Pradesh0866‐ 2220445               

90  

Tamil Nadu 5  Sh.  S. Mohan,  Sh. 

S.  Kavita,  Smt.  S. Gangadhevi  and Smt. S. Kala 

Mango and other fruits  pulp/juice processing unit 

1600 MT  M/s.  Amman  Food Products                              Factory:  Thellana  Halli (Vill),  Dindal  (PO), Palacode  (TK), Dharmapuri  (Dist)  ‐ 635111, Tamil Nadu 

9843287191 Bank of  India, Dharmapuri Branch(8172), 72, Nethaji Bye‐Pass Road, Dharmapuri  ‐ 636701 Tamil Nadu, Tel No. 04342‐262880, 262870 

6  Sh. M. Perumal, Sh. M. Swetaranyam, Sh.  V. Haridoss, Sh. M. Palani and Mrs. P. Mallika 

Processing and exports of life saving anticancer drug  

Vinroelbine tartrate ‐ 14000 gm, Vinblastine sulfate ‐ 7000 gm Vincristine sulfate ‐ 5000 gm  

M/s. Vinkem Lab Pvt. Ltd                                         AH‐29, Shanthi Colony, 4th Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai ‐ 600040 Factory: Plot G‐58, SIDCO Industrial Estate Kakkalur‐ 602 003, Thuruvallur Dist. 

044‐26201796, 26201781 

NABARD and  Bank of India, Chennai Corporate Banking Branch, IV Floor, Tarapore Towers, 826, Anna Salai, Chenai‐ 600 002 

7  Shri  K.Remesh Kumar,  Shri  V. Sharav,  Shri K.Sreedharan  and Smt.  Rina Venugopal 

Mango  pulp processing  

10800  MT  / P.A. 

 M/s.  Newgen  Agro Processors  Pvt.  Ltd.  “Leelavathi”,  69/5, Level  5,  Armenian Street,  Chennai  – 600001,  Tamil  Nadu  Factory: Karuthamarampatty Chaparthi  Post  Sokkadi Village Krishnagiri Taluk 635106 Tamil Nadu 

044‐42627778, 09841024277 

Corporation Bank,. Krishnagiri Branch, No. 65, Second  Cross,  Co‐operative  Colony, Krishnagiri  –  635001,  Dist.  Krishnagiri,  Tamil Nadu Tel No. 04343‐235994, 235995 

8  M. Thangamani,V. Jaya, S. Kamalraj, K. Muniraj, P. Kalalvani, T.C. Chinnarasu and K.M. Muniyappan.  

Production of fruit pulp from Mango & Other fruit   

5200 tons / year 

M/s. Sri Samundeeswari Food Products Pvt. Ltd               Factory: Narinyanri (Vill & PO), Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District. ‐ 635901Office: Muthagoundanoor Puthagaram Post Pudupettai Via Thirupatthur Taluk Vellore Dist. 

04179‐294500, 9842317630 

The Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd., Kandili Branch 18/1, Chavadi Street, Kandili ‐ 635 901, dist: Velllore Ph. 04179 ‐ 48205 

Karnataka 9  Sh. A. Vittalaraya 

Hegde and Smt. Geetha G. Hegde 

Cashew processing  

1125 tons/ annum  

 M/s. Sri Laxmi Devi Cashews                              S. No. 158‐2‐A, Nellikar Village, Mangalore Taluk, Karnataka  

9880726395 Corporation Bank, Salmar, Karkala Branch, Main Road near, S V temple Dist. Udupi, Karnataka 574104, ph. 08258‐730225 

91  

10  Smt.  B.Sharada Kini 

Processing of raw cashew nuts 

45  Qtls  (60 Bags) 

  M/s.  Sri  Ganesh Cashew  Industries   Tarikatte  Cross  Road, Belve  ‐  576212, Kundapura, Udupi Dist. Karnataka 

08259‐283217, 9740730317 

Canara  Bank,  BelveUDUPI‐  576  212Tel Phone : 08259 283222 

11  Sh.  Baburao Wadikar  &  Mrs. Shalini Wadikar 

Production / Sale of grape wine 

200000  liters per batch 

M/s.  Indian  Ambience Vineyards  P.  Ltd   69/B,  N.H.  9,  Tadola‐Taluka  Basavakalyan‐585327,  Dist.  Bidar, Karnataka  

08481‐258666, 09902846659, 09423975430 

State Bank of Hyderabad, Basvakalyan Branch (20238), Dist. Bidar, Karnataka Tel No. 08481 250358, 251343 

12  Sh. Gurunath Rao, Sh.  Mallesh,  Sh. K.V.  Jadar,  Sh.  T. Shantappa and Sh. R. Raju 

Cultivation, Processing  and Export  of Gherkins 

2500 MT  per annum 

 M/s.  Venkateshwara Agro  Exports   Sy. No. 374 B, Holalu to Hadagali  Road,  Hire Hadagali  Hobli, Knatebennur, Havinahadagali  Tq. Bellari  Dist.  KarnatakaOffice: No. 40/3/16, 1st Main,  2nd  Floor, Maruthi  Extn,  Devaiah Park,  Bangalore  ‐ 560021 

080‐23328028, 09008189396, 09900900168 

State  Bank  of  India,  Kumara  Park Branch(1626),  Badaganadu  Sangha  Bldg., Seshadripuram, Kumara Park West, Bangalore ‐ 560020 Tel No.  (080) 23444280, 23444370, 080‐23564370 

13  Dr.  Basavaraj Girennavar  and Shri  Shashikanth Math 

establishment  of grape juice based wine  production unit. 

1.5 lakh liters / annum 

M/s.  Rico Winery  Pvt. Ltd                                         14

th  Km,  NH‐13 

(Bijapur‐Solapur Highway)  Kannal  Post, Tq  &  Dist.  Bijapur  – 586119 

09741414048, 08352‐208079,  080‐41140532 

Syndicate Bank, Bijapur Branch, Gulab Plaza, Siddeswara  Road,  Bijapur  –  586101, Karnataka. Tel No. 08352‐250120, 251251 

Himachal Pradesh 14  Sh. Sanjay 

Aggarwal and Smt. Sunita Aggarwal 

Processing and preservation of fruits and vegetables with state of art technology 

Deep Freeze Storage ‐ 1000 MT, Controlled Atmoshpher ‐ 100 MT 

 M/s. Dev Bhumi Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd                     Inraprastha Bhawan, 17 & 18, New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi ‐ 110033 

27122277, 27242994, 27112592, 27441616, 9810243326, 27465517 / 16 

Bank of Baroda, 17/18, New Sabzi Mandi, Indraprastha Bhawan Azadpur, Delhi ‐ 110033 

15  Shri Sobha Ram  Trout  Fish Canning  and Preservation 

1  Ton/day,   300 ton/annum 

 M/s. Trout Fish Canning & Preservation                       Office & Unit location: Village Shanag, P.O. Bahang, Teh. Manali, Dist.Kullu ‐ 175 103, Himanchel Pradesh 

094180‐62237, 098160‐83688 

Canara  Bank,  Akhara  Bazar,  Kullu  ‐ 175101, Tel No. 01902‐222134 

16  Shri  Rishi  Arora and  Shri  Bhanu Mahajan 

Preservation  of fruits  and vegetables  (like peas,  cucumber, capsicum, tomatoes  etc.) after dehydration and packing  

3732 MT   M/s. Banarsi Agro Fresh                                    Office: Main Bazar, Near Post Office, Pathankot, Punjab Site: Village Bhogrwan, Tehsil Indora, Distt. Kangra, Himanchel Pradesh. 

9815314141 092164‐59301 

State  Bank  of  India, Main  Branch,    Dhangu Road,  Pathankot‐  145001  Punjab,  Tel  No. 0186‐2226751          

92  

Haryana 17  Dr.  Shann‐E‐Meet 

Singh Insan Processing  and manufacturing  of aloe  vera  and allied proudcts 

2000  kg  of aloe vera 

M/s.  Sach  Herbotech Products                              Village‐Nejia  Khera, Bajekhan‐Nejia  Khera Road,  Sirsa  Taluk  Sirsa, Dist. Haryana ‐ 125055 

09254000175, 09996133333  

Oriental Bank of Commerce, City Thana Road, Sirsa  ‐  125055,  Tel.  No  01666‐228744, 220611, 220031 

Uttar Pradesh 18  Sh. Dev Vrat 

Sharma, Sh. Sudha Ram Sharma, Sh. Priyavrat Sharma, Smt. Swati Sharma and Sh. J.P. Sharma 

Processing of honey 

5400 MT / Year  

M/s. Hi‐Tech Natural Products (India) Ltd.         Regd. Office: 205, Jawahar Gali, Farsh Bazar, Shahdara Delhi ‐ 110032, Factory: Vill & P.O. Beerakheri (Saharanpur) U.P‐ 247 340 

22304407, 22135556, 9811794789, 9868119855 

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gangoh Branch Saharanpur0132‐ 232144,236075 

19  Sh.  Ravi  Agarwal, Sh.  Satish  Kumar Agarwal,  Sh. Dinesh  Kumar Agarwal  and  Sh. Nitin Agarwal 

Frozen  fruits  & vegetables processing  with IQF Technology 

1  MT  per hour 

 M/s.  Natura  Green Food Products Pvt. Ltd   Bisauli Gate, Chandausi ‐ 202412 Uttar Pradesh Works  and  Office: 4.  KM,  Chandausi Badaun  Road,  Village Pasmanandpur,  Dist: Badaun U.P 

05921‐250133, 266133, 09897536822, 09897641106, 09927016233 

Canara  Bank,  Chandausi  Branch,  Hussaini Bazar,  Chandausi    Uttar  Pradesh‐  202412. 05921‐250099 

Maharashtra 20  Shri  Rajesh 

Lalxminarayan Mundada 

Pre‐cooling,  pack house  &  cold storage  unit  and processing  of raisin (bedana) 

1000 MT  M/s.  Rohini  Agrotech   19/A,  Opp.  Shah‐Lulla Mahanagar,  Kupwad‐Miraj,  M.I.D.C.  Road, Kupwad  Distrct  Sangli, Maharashtra 

9923254540 IDBI  Bank,  Sangli  Branch,  Vyankatesh Embassy,  Opp.  Sangli  Zilla  Parishad,  Sangli‐416416                                    Tel No.0233‐2326861 

21  Mrs.  Vibhavari  N. Ingale,  Mrs. Sandhya Mahadik, Mrs.  Lata Deshmukh  &  Mr. Saurabha  N. Ingale 

Processing  of fruits  & manufacturing  of juices, jams etc 

1 MT per day  M/s.  VLSS  Foods  Pvt. Ltd                                         Office:  C/2,  Ashoka Tripex,  S.  No.  209/4, Kalyani  Nagar,  Pune  ‐ 411006 Site:  Plot  no  88,  B.U Bhandari  Industrial Estate  Sanswadi,  Tal. Shirur, dist. Pune  ‐ 412 208 

020‐64016406,           40045801,           952137‐646815 

Indian  Bank,  Kalyaninagar  Branch,  Pune   Tel  No.  020‐26650105 020‐26650106 

93  

22  Smt.  Manju Choudhary 

Processing  of fruits  and manufacturing  of pulps, jams etc. 

2200 MT   M/s.  Parshva  Food International                      Office:  Plot  No.  239, Old  Bagadgani,  Small Factory  Area,  Dist. Nagpur  ‐  440008Site: Gat No. 119, PH No. 33, Mouza  Bidgaon,  Tal Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur, Maharashtra 

917122778824 Bank  of  India,  Nagpur  Corporate  Banking Branch,  Bank  of  India  Bldg, Mezzanie  Floor, S.V.  Patel  Marg,  Nagpur  ‐  440001  Tel  No. 0712‐2527191, 2542899 

23  Shri  Atul  D. Banginwar and Sh. Vikas  D. Banginwar 

Frozen  fruits  & vegetables processing  with IQF Technology 

1200 MT  M/s. Trimurti Foodtech Pvt.  Ltd   Office: A‐5, MIDC, Near Railway  Station, Aurangabad  ‐  431005Site:  Wadgaon  Amli, Post‐Jamgaon,  Tal. Parner,  Dist. Ahmednagar  ‐  414103 (MS) 

0240‐2349819, 2242130/31 

State Bank of India, Industrial Finance Branch, Aurangabad 

24  Sh. Praful Prakash Bafna 

Infrastructure facility for pre‐cooling, grading, pack house and cold stroage for grapes  

Cold storage ‐ 60 MT and pre‐cooling ‐ 8 MT 

M/s. Bafna Exports           Head Office: 32, Market Yard, Gultekdi, Pune ‐ 411037. Site: G. No. 468/3, A/p, Dewkarwadi, Tal. Daund, Dist. Pune ‐ 412 207. 

020‐24261393, 24261394, 24272809 

AXIS Bank, Bund Garden Branch, Ashoka Galaxy, Plot No. 1, Galaxy Society, Dhole Patil Road Pune‐ (020) 66016270 / 71 / 72 

Jammu &    Kahsmir 25  Shri Bashir Ahmad 

Rather Setting up processing / grading and packing walnut/ walnut kernels nut 

1600 tonnes of walnuts / annum  

     M/s. Dara Enterprises                          Site: Village Dara, Harwan, Srinagar, Kashmir (J&K) 

0194‐246338, 2462348, 9858483196 

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd, SKUAST Branch, Shalimar Srinagar, 0242‐2464366 

26  Miss.  Reshma Fayaz  and  Miss Vasifya Fayaz 

Processing  of fruit  and vegetable  unit like  apple  culls, cheery,  pears, plums  apricots etc. 

80 tons / day   M/s. Sultan Agro Tech Pvt.  Ltd   Office:  Opp.  SKAUST, Mirakabad  Shalimar, Srinagar,  Kashmir‐191121Factory:  Food park  SIDCO  Industrial Complex,  Khonmoh, Sriagar, Kashmir. 

0194‐2461528, 9858060052, 9906965997, 9858082525  

The  Jammu  &  Kashmir  Bank  Ltd.,  Maulana Azad Road, SrinagarPh. 2474043, 2452716 

27  Ms.  Syed Masarat Bashir 

Cut  flower production (under controlled conditions), value addition  & marketing 

60000 Lillium Flowers  per year,  120000 Bulblets, 70000 Carnations per year 

M/s. Eternity                      Office: M/s Eternity, 198, Jawahar Nagar, Srinagar, Kashmir ‐ 190008, J & K Site: Lal Nagar, Channapora, Srinagar, Kashmir 

9419018980, 9906601849 

The Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd., Business Development Promoterion Centre, Maulana Azad Road, Srinagar Ph. 2480692, 2452658, 2471723 

94  

28  Sh.  Shah  Mohd Iqbal,  Sh Mahmood  Riyaz, Sh Ali Mohd. Shah and  Sh.  Javid Ahmad Shah. 

Grading  and packing  of walnuts  and almonds  and their kernels  

Walnuts, Kernels, Almonds, Kernels  ‐ 456000 Kgs. 

M/s.  Kashur  Doon Enterprises                          I.G.C.  Lassipora,  Dist. Pulwama  Kashmir  ‐ 192301 

09469215789, 09419536721, 0194‐2436063 

The  Jammu  &  Kashmir  Bank  Ltd.,  Shopian Main  Branch,  Dist.  Pulwama,  KashmirPh. 01933‐260229 

Gujarat 

29  Sh. Hamid Abdulbhai Kalaniya and Sh. Imran Sulemanbhai Kalaniya 

Dehydration of onions, garlic and other vegetables 

1600 MT per annum 

M/s. Vibrant Dehydro Foods Pvt. Ltd                    Site: Survey No. 154, Paikee, Mahuva Bhadrod Road, O pp. Reliance Petrol Pump, Mahuva ‐ 364290 Dist. Bhavnagar 

2844‐222884,  Bank of Baroda, Mahuva Branch ‐ Kumar Complex, Nr Old Bus Stand, Mahuva‐ 364 290,Dist. Bhavnagar, Gujarat, India  Ph: 91 02844_223504. 

30  Sh.  Kapadiya Ranchhodhbhai Haribhai, Sh. Vliya Bhupatbhai Raghabhai,  Sh. Vliya  Manjibhai Bhuthabhai  and Sh.  Khodifad Babubhai Madhabhai 

Dehydration  of onions, garlic and other vegetables 

1200 MT  per annum 

 M/s. Amul Dehydration                       Registered Office and Factory: Survey No. 49, Paikee 2, Village : Siloj, Ta Una, Dist. Junagadh, Gujarat, 

9825918606  Bank of India, Una Branch, Veraval Road, Una,  Dist. Junagadh Junagadh ‐ 362560, Gujarat Tel No. 02875‐222529 

Uttrakhand 31  Shri    Ajay  Kumar 

Agarwal  and  Smt. Priti Agarwal 

Frozen  peas  and vegetables processing  with IQF Technolgoy 

3000 MT/annum 300 MT/annum 

M/s. R.K. Frozen                Office and Site: R.K. Puram, Manpur Road, Kashipur, Dist. Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand 

05947‐275300, 276300, 9837046878, 9837309878 

Punjab  National  Bank,  (0262)  Kashipur Branch,  Kashipur,  Dist.  U.S.  Nagar‐244713, Uttarakhand,  Tel  No.  05947‐274033,05942‐260792 

32  Shri  Shiv  Kumar Sawalka,  Shri Kailash  Kumar Sawalka,  Smt. Asha  Sawalka  and Smt.Uma Sawalka 

Fruits  and vegetables processing  with IQF 

2.5 MT/hr.  M/s. Samridhi Bio‐Energy Pvt. Ltd.                  Office: 624, Udyog Vihar, Phase‐V, Gurgaon ‐ 122016 Site: Village Garhinegi, Tehsil Jaspur, Dist. Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand. 

0124‐2346368, 2348739 

SIDBI, D‐1 & D‐2/8, Civil Line, Near Janta Inter College,  Rudrapur,  Dist.  U.S.  Nagar‐263153, Uttarakhand, Tel No. / Punjab National Bank, (0262)  Kashipur  Branch,  Kashipur,  Dist.  U.S. Nagar‐244713,  Uttarakhand,  Tel  No.  05947‐274033 

33  Shri Keshav Singla, Shri  Amit  Singla, Smt Veena  Singla, Smt. Shefali Singla and  Smt/ Chanchal Chaudhry 

Processing  and preserving  of peas,  fruits  and vegetables  with IQF Technology. 

2000 kg/hour of peas pods 

 M/s. Gopal Foods             Registered Office: 4 Model Colony, Kasipur Road, Rudrapur, Dist. U.S. Nagar, Uttarakhand Site: Beria Road, Bazpur ‐ 262 401, Dist. Udham Siingh Nagar, Uttarakhand. 

05949‐281245, 281859, 282759 

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Bajpur Branch, Dist. Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand and Regional off. C‐18/B, Deen Dayal Puram, Bareilly ‐ 243122, Tel No. 2302473, 2302474, 2302475              

95  

Assam 34  Shri  Basanta 

Kumar Gogoi, Shri Dipek  Kr.  Gogoi, Shri  Dipen  Saikia, Shri  Sekhar  Jyoti Gogoi  and  Shri Madhuya Gogoi 

Manufacturing of bamboo  mat corrugated sheets 

1417500  sq. ft.  per annum 

   M/s. Brahmaputra Forest Products Pvt. Ltd.                                       Madhabpur ‐ 784164, Narayanpur, P.O. Dikrong, Dist. Lakhimpur, Assam  Factory: C/O Basanta Gogoi, P.O. Dhalpur Dist. Lakhimpur Pichalaguri, Assam India ‐ 784165 

03752‐262145, 242882, 244007, 09435085638, 09435084684 

United  Bank  of  India,  Narayanpur  Branch, Dikrong,  Lakhimpur,  Dist‐Lakhimpur,  Assam, Pin  ‐ 784164,                   Ph. No.  (03752) 262240  

35  Ms.  Kshirada Pathak 

Food  processing unit of  fruits  and vegetables  to produce  jam, jelly,  sauces, pickles,  ketchup, squash 

310 MT    M/s.  Madhus  Food Products                              Betkuchi,  Lokhra Chariali, P.O. Sawkuchi, Guwahati‐ 781 034 

097062‐36378,  0361‐2133411 

UCO  Bank,  Rajgarh  Road    Branch  (1669), Bhangagarh,  Guwahati‐781005,  Assam    Tel No. 0361‐2460144, 2529444  

36  Shri  Amitesh Kumar  Bajaj,  Shri Ashok  Kumar Bajaj,  Shri  Krishan Kumar  Bajaj,  Smt. Sujata  Bajaj  and Shri Shorav Bajaj 

Processing  of carbonated natural fruit  juice viz.  oranges, pineapples, litchis,  mangoes etc. 

2000 liter per hour 

M/s.  Sakshi  Agro Beverage                             SITE:  Plot No. D,  Silver Drop  Industrial Complex,  Village‐Sila Mohekhati,  Mouza‐‐Sila  Sinduri  Ghopa, N.H.#  31,  Amingaon, Guwahati  ‐  781031, Dist.  Kamrup,  AssamOffice:  Station  Road, PO & Dist. Nalbari ‐ 781 335 

0361‐2680093, 2680822, 09435042214, 09435184079 

United Bank of  India, Guwahati Branch(Opp. Sheikh  Brothers)  Hem  Baruach  Road, Panbazar, Guwahati ‐ 781001 (0361‐2540281, 2540043, 2540041, 2540042) 

Meghalaya 37  Mr. Ali Asgar, Mr. 

Sunil Kumar and Mr. Kejendro D. Sangma 

Cashew nut processing unit  

40 QT./ Day  M/s. Megha Cashew Private Limited,                 Rajabagan EPIP, Byrnihat, RI‐Bhoi Dist. – 793101, Meghalaya   

03638263176     09436103077 

EXIM & IDBI Bank Industrial Development Bank of India Limited, Northern‐Eastern Zonal Office : G.S. Road, Guwahati ‐ 781 005  Ph. 0361‐2529520 / 21 / 22 

38  Sh. Kailash Agarwal 

Processing of Pineapple, Passion Fruit 

2120 MT/annum  

 M/s. K.D. Agro Industries                            C/o, Maruti Centre, T.D. Road, Tura, West Garo Hills, Meghalaya‐794001  Prop. Sri Kailash Agarwal, Village Bangalkatta, P.O. Chibinang West Garo Hills, Meghalaya ‐ 794001. 

9436112092  State Bank of India, Tura Bazar (E) Branch, T.D Road, P.O ,Tura, Dist: West Garo Hills, Meghalaya ‐ 794001.  Ph. 03651‐222288, 221554            

96  

 Kerala 

39  Sh.  H.  Satish Kamath,  Sh.  H. Gokuldas  Kamath, Sh.  H.  Santhosh Kamath,  Sh.  H. Ganesh  Kamath and  Sh.  H. Guruprasad Kamath.  

Manufacturing of desiccated coconut powders 

20  tons  of coconuts/day (50000 nuts) 

 M/s.  Vittal  Agro Industries                            Office:  KM‐VIII‐577, Govt.  Hospital  Circle, Hosdurg,  Kanhangad, Kerala  Factory:  S.No. 175  /  1A1  &  1A2,  99 Belur  Village,  Hosdurg, Taluk,  Kasargod  Dist, Kerala. 

09447773548, 09447100548 

Syndicate  Bank,  Kanhangad,  Kerala  KMC II/1204,  Main  Road  Near  Bus  Stand, Kottachery, Kerala ‐ 670315Ph. 0467‐2204123 

40  Sh. S. Venugopal  Processing  of coconut  for production  of virgin coconut oil and  coconut vinegar 

5000 coconuts  a day 

      M/s.  Kulanada Agricultural  Marketing &  Processing  Co‐operative  Society  Ltd.   Co‐Operative  Society Ltd. Madhushudhalayam Buildings,  Panangadu P.O.,  Kulanada, Pathanamthitta  Dist.  ‐ 689503, Kerala 

9447399927, 04734262350 

State  Bank  of  India,  Pandalam  Branch (10703),  Koloothara  Building,  MG  Road, Pandalam, Dist Kerala Tel No. 04734‐254755 / 207400 

41  Sh. Kapila Tissera  Aqua  Technolgy Park 

   M/s.  Kerala  Aqua Ventures  International Ltd.                                       Office:  O/o  Firma, Fisheries  Complex, Building No. XL. II, Door No.  1,  Dr.  Salim  Ali Road,  Behind  High Court,  Kochi,  Kerala  ‐ 682018 Site: Kadungalloor, U.C. College,  P.O.  Aluva, ErnaKulam, Kerala 

   Canara  Bank, M.G.  Road  Branch,  Ernakulam, Kochi  ‐  682  035 Ph. 2371921, 2354374, 2371921 

   

97  

ANNEXURE‐IIIQuestionnaire “A, B & C”

“QUESTIONNAIRE‐A” 

(FOR THE PROMOTER/S) 

Date of Visit: 

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

A  GENERAL > 

i  Name of the Unit  

ii  Location (Full Address)   

iii  Nature/Type  of  the  Unit  (Proprietary  /Partnership  / Pvt. / Public Limited Company 

Tick as applicablei. Proprietorship  ii. Partnership iii. Pvt. Limited Company iv. Public Limited Company v. Cooperative Society vi. Federation of Farmer Groups vii. Any Other (specify) 

iv  Name of the Owner / Key Persons & their designations a. Owner/Partner (s) (i) (ii) (iii) 

b.  Key Person/Official(s), if any (i) (ii) (iii) 

 

v  Agripreneurs (promoter/s) are (Please tick the correct explanation) ‐   

i) Experienced  in  the  line,  though  no  formal degree 

ii) Formally  trained  ( having  technical degree  in the activity) 

iii) Neither  formally  trained  nor  experienced when the unit was set up 

iv) Other  businesses  undertaken  prior  to  taking up VCA assisted agribusiness 

vi  Contact Numbers of  the owners  (Mobile  /  Landline  / Fax/ email)   

vii  Year of Establishment of the Unit

viii  Name of the Financing Bank 

ix  Address of the Financing Bank   

B  FINANCIAL > 

(i)  Total Cost of the Project   (i) As per DPR: Rs. 

98  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

(ii) As accepted by the Bank: Rs. 

(ii)  SFAC notified Consultant  / Agency  that prepared  the DPR  (Name &  Address,  including  phone  numbers  of the contact person)   

(iii)  Amount of assistance under PDF paid, if any Rs. 

  OR 

(iv)  If the DPR was prepared by the promoters themselves.  Whether it was appraised by any other agency before being submitted to the Bank?   If  yes,  the  name  and  contact  numbers  of  the  said agency  

Yes / No  Yes/ No   

(v)  Borrower’s Margin @     %  Rs.

(vi)  Total Amount of Loan availed of  

Rs.

(vii)  Rate of Interest charged by the Bank   %

(viii)  Repayment Period (in years)               Years

(ix)  Moratorium, if any (in months/years) ________Months / Years 

(x)  Repayment Installments (Pl tick) Quarterly / Half‐yearly / Annual  Amount of each installment: Rs. 

(xi)  Date of Application to SFCA for VCA

(xii)  Date of Receipt of Sanction of VCA from SFCA

(xiii)   Amount  of  Venture  Capital  Assistance  (VCA) committed by SFAC 

Rs.

(xiv)  Amount of VCA received by 30 November 2011 Rs.

(xv)  Details  about  assistance  /  subsidies  received  from other sources  

C  PROJECT‐SPECIFIC > 

(i)  Broad Nature of business of  the unit  (Please  tick  the correct explanation) ‐   

(a) Horticulture(b) Floriculture (c) Medicinal & Aromatic Plants (d) Minor Forest Produce (e) Sericulture (f) Organic Farming (g) Vermicompost (h) Apiculture (i) Plantation Crops (j) Fishery (k) Polyhouses (l) Greenhouse (m) Cold chain (n) IQF processing unit 

99  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

(o) Other (Pl specify)  

(ii)  Specific activities undertaken by  the unit  (Please  tick the correct explanation) ‐     

(i)  Food  processing  (incl.  vegetable  processing) (ii) Fruit processing (iii) Processing of Medicinal & Aromatic crops  (iv) Agro‐processing  (not coming under (i), (ii) and (iii) above) (v) Cold Storage (vi) Pack House (viii) General PHM Facility  (ix) Other (Pl specify)   

(iii)  Main saleable product(s) of the project (i)(ii) (iii)   

(iv)  Project  location  area  (Please  tick  the  correct explanation) ‐    

Urban (Population above 1 lakh) Semi‐urban: More than 5000 but less than 1 lakh Rural: Population less than 5000 

(v)  Is  the project  location coming under any AEZ?  If yes, for what products? 

(vi)  Is  the  project  related  to  the products  notified  under AEZ? 

(vii)  Was  it  the  first agribusiness project of  its kind  in  the area/District? 

Yes / No

(viii)  If  no,  how many  projects were  already  there  before this unit came up? 

(ix)  If yes, what from the following would best explain the reason for setting up the project? 

(Please tick the right choice/choices (a) Availability of subsidies. (b) Availability of VCA? (c) A new product having potential market? (d) An old product with unsatisfied market? (e) Old  product  but  better  technology  / more 

environment‐friendly? (f) Other (Pl specify)  

(x)  Average total number of people employed  in the unit (considering both slack and peak levels) 

(xi)  Of the above, the number in ‐  (i) Managerial/Supervisory category ‐(i) Skilled Category (Technician) – (iii) Unskilled category (Labourers) – (iv) Others (Specify) –  

(xii)  Of  the  total employees, how many are permanent & how many temporary (seasonal employment) 

Permanent: Skilled:          /Unskilled:  Seasonal: Skilled:          /Unskilled: 

(xiii)  Are  the  employees  in  skilled  and  “others”  category commute from nearby “rural” areas? 

Yes / No If yes, the number that does it:   

(xiv)  Main raw materials used by the unit 1.

100  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

2.3.    

(xv)  How  is  the  raw  material  procured?  Please  tick  the most appropriate explanation 

a) From open market b) Directly  from  farmers  under  informal 

arrangement c) Directly  from  farmers  under  formal  contract 

farming d) Other method (Please explain)  

(xvi)  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers under an  informal arrangement,  the number of  such farmers covered & the villages  

Farmers: Villages: 

(xvii)  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers under a  formal contract, the number of such farmers covered & the villages 

Farmers: Villages: 

(xviii)  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers under  a  formal  contract,  has  a  copy  of  the  same  collected by the interviewer?   

Yes    / No

(xix)  Whether the farmers organised into Farmer Groups Yes/ No

(xx)  If answer to above is yes, then  (a) Whether  such  groups  existed  before  the project  OR  came  into  existence  after  the project  as  an  impact  thereof?  (tick  as applicable) 

(b) Role of the Farmer goups ( tick as applicable) i) Negotiating prices ii) Collecting produce from members iii) Intermediate processing, if any ( specify) iv) Transport v) Any other ( specify) 

 

(xxi)  How are the raw materials procured from the sources? Please tick the correct choice.  

(a) Raw  form without any primary processing by the farmers at the village level  

(b) After some primary processing by the farmers themselves at the villages 

(c) After  some primary processing  at  the  village levels by some third party 

(d) After  some  primary  processing  by  the Company at the villages 

 

(xxii)  If primary processing done at the village level itself by the farmers/Company, briefly indicate its nature  

>

  Approximate  Radius  (Kms)  of  the  area  from  within which, the raw materials are procured 

        Kms

  If raw materials are procured directly from the farmers under a formal contract, what are the key features of the backward linkages? 

1.2. 3. 

101  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

4.5. 6. 7.  

  Did  the setting up of  the unit directly  resulted  in  the introduction  of  some  new  crop  (crop diversification) in the covered villages? 

Yes / NoIf yes, please indicate the new crop/s & area     Crop                         New Area (Acres)    

  If  yes,  indicate  the  type of extention  services,  if any, privided by the promoters. 

Please tick as applicable; a) Information/ awareness b) Training/ technical know how. c) Credit d) Seeds e) Fertilizers f) Insecticides/pesticides g) Any other ( specify) 

  If  the  unit  did not  result  in  crop  diversification,  how were the concerned farmers marketing their products before the unit came up? 

Narration:     

  Has  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  provided  an  assured market to the concerned farmers for their produce? 

Yes / NoIf no, please indicate the reasons:   

  What approximate % of  the  total marketable  surplus of the farmers is procured by the unit? 

   % 

  If it is less than 75%, where are the farmers selling the balance produce? 

(i) Local APMC/Society: (ii) Directly to Other Processors (iii) Directly to traders/agents (iv) Other (pl specify)  

  Has  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  resulted  in  higher incomes to the farmers for their produce? 

Yes / No

  If yes, the details please    

Narration:

D  Financing Bank‐specific (From agripreneurs’ point of view)

(i)  Were the promoters themselves aware of the Venture Capital  Scheme  when  they  approached  the  bank? (Please rick the correct choice) 

Yes/ No 

(ii)  If yes, what was the source of their knowledge? (i) Newspapers(ii) Bank/s (iii) Friends (iv) NABARD’s DDM (iv) Some other Govt. Dept. (Pl specify) 

102  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

(v) Website 

(iii)  Were the Bank’s branch officials aware of the Venture Capital Scheme when the promoters approached them for the loan? (Please tick the correct choice) 

(i) Yes, awareness was at the Branch level itself.(ii)  Yes,  but  the  awareness was  only  at  the  RO level, not branch level (iii) No, there was no awareness at both the RO and branch levels 

(iv)  If  yes,  did  the  Bank  provide  the  full  details  of  the Scheme to the agripreneurs? 

(i) No(ii) Yes, with written guidelines & literature 

(v)  Month/year of submission of DPR to the Bank

(vi)  Month/Year of sanction of Bank Loan

(vii)  Was VCA projected  in  the DPR  itself when  submitted to the Bank? (Please tick) 

(i) Yes(ii) No, it was subsequently included   

(viii)  Are the financial terms of the VCA clearly understood by the agripreneur/s?  [Note:  If  the  answer  is  yes,  the  interviewer  may ascertain  the  exact  basis  on  which  the  VCA  was worked out. Please  also  indicate whether VCA  terms were fully or partly understood/not understood.]  

Yes / No 

(ix)  Are  the  agripreneurs  aware  of  the  objectives of  the VCA? 

Yes / No(Objectives could be asked tactfully) 

(x)  If  yes,  to what  extent,  according  to  them,  have  the said objectives been achieved? 

(xi)  What, according  to  the agripreneurs, are  the positive impacts of VCA on the project? 

(a) It helped in bridging the resource gap(b) It encouraged setting up of the project (c) It  facilitated  higher  investment  for  higher 

production/better production technology (d) It  promoted  overall  development  of 

agribusiness in the project area (e) All of the above (f) None of the above (Pl specify) 

E  Impact of the Project – Hard & Soft Parameters

(i) 

Sr No 

Parameter Before the Project 

After the Project  Difference(+ / ‐) 

1  Level of Employment (Number)

2  Level of Wage Rate (Rs./per day)

3  Acreage  under  the  concerned  crop/s (Acres) 

1.2. 3. 

1.2. 3. 

1. 2. 3. 

 Reasons for increase in the area under different crops:   

  

(ii)  Increase in the annual income of farmers (Rs.) >

  Marginal Farmers (< 2.5 acres)  Before:             After:              Change: 

103  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

 Small Farmers (> 2.5 acres & < 5 acres)  Other Farmers (> 5 acres)  

Before:             After:              Change:  Before:             After:              Change:  

(iii)  Skill Upgradation >  

  In  case  of  farmers,  how  many  imparted  direct  skill upgradation inputs by the Company?   

Number: 

  How many more farmers were trained by the farmers trained directly by the Company? 

Number:   

  In  case  of  agripreneurs,  how  many  received  skill upgradation inputs through running of the Company?  

Number:   

  How  many  more  agripreneurs  were  trained  by  the core agripreneurs of the Company?     

Number: 

(iv)  Increase in the income of Agripreneurs (Rs.) > Income before the establishment of the project >  Income after the establishment of the project >  Incremental Income  

 Rs.  Rs.  Rs.       

(v)  Supplementary Benefits of the Project >

104  

Sr No  Queries  Details / Response 

   

Sr No 

Parameter Improvement (Please narrate briefly) 

1  Road  connectivity  (laying  of  new roads, widening of old roads, etc.) 

2  Electricity  (new  electrification, improvement in supply, etc.) 

3  Communication  (availability of phone facility,  network  towers  for  mobile communication) 

4  Emergence  of  some  new  NFS activities  (ancillary  units,  processing of bye‐products, etc.) 

5  Credit Flow (increase in GLC flow after the setting up of the unit, financing of new units, etc.) 

6  Banking  branch  network  (opening  of new bank branches  in unbanked area due to increased economic activity) 

7  Any  other  change  brought  about  by the project (pl specify)  

  

 

F  State Nodal Agency‐specific (From agripreneurs’ point of view)

(i)  Are the agripreneurs aware of the name and  location of  the State SFAC / State’s Nodal Agency  for the VCA Scheme? 

(ii)  If yes, its name and location  

(iii)  Had  an  official  from  the  State  SFAC  /  State’s  Nodal Agency  visited  the  project  before  the  VCA  was sanctioned? (Please tick)  

(i) Yes, he had visited on his own (ii) Yes, he had visited for pre‐sanction survey on SFCA’s advice (iii) No, he did not visit 

(iv)  Has  the  Nodal  Agency  revisited  the  project  after sanction/release of the VCA? 

Yes / No 

(v)  Any other assistance like training or guidance received from the State Nodal Agency? If yes, please specify   

 

 

(Signature of the Promoter interviewed)                            Name & Designation of SFAC Coordinator / Interviewer 

Name & Designation:                  Contact Phone Numbers:      

Contact Phone Numbers: 

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 

 

 

 

 

105  

Observations of the Interviewer 

 (Please attach a separate sheet) 

 

Impact of implementation of Scheme in terms of intended benefits ‐ 

(i) Backward Linkages 

(ii) Credit Flow from banks in Agri‐business sector 

(iii) Creation of Awareness among farmers and bankers about benefits of agri‐business development 

(iv) Generation of rural employment 

(v) Enhancement in rural incomes 

(vi) Evaluation of adequacy and effectiveness of the existing operational guidelines of the SFAC Scheme 

(vii) Extent to which VCA assistance was relevant, adequate and helpful 

(viii) Suggestions, if any, on the terms and conditions of VCA and its procedural aspects 

(ix) Suggested modifications  in  existing  policy  guidelines  /  operational  support  and  other  initiatives 

with adequate reasoning 

(x) Factors  responsible  for  the  delay  in  commencement  of  commercial  production  by  the Units  (if 

applicable) 

(xi) Any  other  aspect,  especially  those  concerning  objectives  of  the  Scheme  as  also  the  Terms  of 

Reference. 

 

 

 

(Signature of the Interviewer) 

Name & Designation: 

Contact Phone Numbers: 

                                                                           

106  

“QUESTIONNAIRE‐B” 

 (FOR THE FINANCING BANK) 

Date of Visit: 

Sl.No.  Queries  Details/Response 

1  Name of the Financing Bank / Branch 

2  Name & Designation of the Official interviewed Name:Designation: Location: Branch / RO If RO, address:    

4  The financing branch is headed by  AGM  /  Chief  Manager  /  Senior  Manager  / Manager / Branch Manager 

5  Is the Bank Lead Bank in the concerned District? Yes / No

6  From where did  the  financing branch hear about  the SFAC and the VCA Scheme? 

(i) Directed by the Controlling Office (ii) Entrepreneur himself informed (iii) LDM intervened and guided (iv) NABARD’s DDM guided (v) Some State Govt. Department  (vi) Website (vii) Other (Pl specify)  

7  Month & Year of the  first Application to SFAC  for the VCA by the Bank 

8  Month  &  Year  of  receipt  of  sanction  letter  for  VCA from SFAC 

9  Month & Year of receipt of  VCA  amount from SFAC

10  Amount of  VCA received by 30 November 2011

11  Amount of VCA sanctioned & received Sanctioned: Rs. Received thus far: Rs.  

12  Has  the  Bank  also  provided  assistance  to  the  unit under Project Development Assistance component? 

Yes / NoIf yes, the amount: Rs. 

13  Has  the  financing of  the unit by  the Bank  resulted  in more similar proposals coming forward?  

Yes/ No

14  If yes, what,  in the opinion of the Bank,  is the reason therefor? 

(i) Availability of VCA Assistance (ii) Unsaturated market for the product (iii) Any other reason  

15  What  are  the  steps  the  Bank  is  taking  for  the popularization of the Scheme? 

(i)(ii) (ii) (iv)  

16  Has  the  RO/ZO  conducted  any  Awareness  /  Yes / No

107  

Sensitization Programme on  the VCA Scheme  for  the Branch Managers? 

If yes, how many conducted and when?  

17  Are the details of the Scheme available at the Branch levels or only at the level of RO? 

(i) Only at the RO level (ii) Also available at the Branch level (iii) Available at both the places (iii) Not available in either of the places 

18  Has  the  Bank  signed  any  MOU  with  SFAC  for participating  in  the  implementation  of  the  VCA Scheme? (Please tick the correct choice) 

(i) Yes, heard but no documents available.(ii) Yes, Bank has  issued a Circular and the same is available in Branch records. (iii) Yes, Bank has issued a Circular and the same is available in RO’s records. (iv) No, no MOU has been signed. (v) Do not know. 

19  What,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Bank,  are  the  strong features of the Scheme? 

(i)(ii) (iii) (iv) 

20  What,  in the opinion of the Bank, are the  features of the Scheme that require improvement? 

(i)(ii) (iii) (iv) 

21  If  yes, what  are  the  specific  improvements  that  are required? 

(i)(ii) (iii) (iv) 

22  Is  the VCA‐linked Loan Account  regular as at  the end of November 2011? 

Yes / No

23  If  no,  what  are  the  reasons  for  the  account  being irregular/NPA? 

(i)(ii) (iii) 

24  If the Account is irregular/NPA, has the Bank informed SFAC? 

Yes / NoIf yes, obtain a copy of the advice 

25  Outstanding Position ( As on 30.11.11)

Bank Loan VCF

Rs. Rs.  

26  Has  the Bank maintaining  separate Account  for SFAC funds? 

Yes / No 

27  How  is  the Bank  treating  the VCA  received  thus  far? (Please tick the correct choice) 

(i) Crediting it to the Loan Account (ii) Credited to a separate Account and released to the unit as per the progress 

28  Is  the  Bank  aware  of  the  PDF  component  of  the Scheme? 

Yes / No

29  Has  the Bank appointed a Nodal Officer  to deal with SFAC? 

Yes / No / Not aware If yes, the name, designation and location of the Nodal Officer:‐   

30  Is the progress of the Scheme regularly discussed and monitored  in  various  periodical Meetings  of  Banks? (SLBC / DCC / BLBC) 

Yes / No

108  

31  If yes, at what level?  (i) State Level (SLBC) (ii) District Level (DCC/DLRC) (iii) Block level (BLBC) 

32  Is  the  financing Branch  submitting  the  required  half‐yearly  Report  to  SFAC  on  the  progress  in implementation? 

Yes / NoIf  yes,  obtain  a  copy  of  the  last  report  so submitted.    

33  Is the unit,  in  the opinion of  the Bank, working along the projected lines? 

Yes / NoIf  no,  what  are  the  specific  areas  of underperformance, the reasons therefor and the suggestions A. Underperforming Areas  (i)  (ii) (ii) B. Reasons (i) (ii) (iii) C. Suggestions (i) (ii) (iii) 

  Has the branch/bank  financed any Producer Group  in the past? 

Yes/No

  If  yes,  the  details  such  as  financial  details,  terms  of financing/securities,  performance  of  the  group,  etc. may be obtained 

  If  no,  reasons  for  the  same  and  whether  the  bank needs any assistance/risk guarantee from SFAC? 

 

 

 

 

(Signature of the Promoter interviewed)        (Signature of the Interviewer) 

Name & Designation:            Name & Designation: 

Contact Phone Numbers:             Contact Phone Numbers: 

 

Date: 

Place: 

 

 

Name & Designation of the SFAC Coordinator:  

Contact Numbers: Mobile No. 

 

109  

“QUESTIONNAIRE‐C” 

 Annexure IV 

(FOR THE FARMERS) 

Date of Visit: 

Sr No 

Name of the Farmers Interviewed (S/Shri) 

Name of the Village 

Distance from the Project Site 

(Kms) 

Total Land Owned (Acres) 

Crops grown for supply to the 

Project 

1    

   

2    

   

3    

   

4    

   

5    

   

6    

   

7    

   

 

Sr No 

Queries  Details 

1  How are the farmers actually linked to the unit? (Tick the appropriate) 

(i) Supply raw materials to the unit directly(ii)  Supply  raw materials  to  the unit  through an agent or middlemen or Farmers Group 

2  How did the farmers come to know of the requirement of the unit and their ability to meet it? 

(i) Through Govt. Extension Agency (ii) The promoters approached them directly (iii) Some middlemen arranged for all (iv) Bank (v) others (specify)  

3  If the farmers supply the raw materials to the unit directly under a formal contract, do they also have a copy of the associated agreement? 

Yes / No

4  Have  they  read  and  understood  various  aspects  of  the agreement  like period of validity, price guarantee,  if any, credit period, transportation, etc.? 

Yes / No

5  Who pays for the transportation of the produce from the farm to the unit – farmers themselves or the unit?   

Farmers / Unit

6  What is the provision in the written agreement, if any, for such transportation of the produce from the farms to the project site? 

(i) Cost borne by the unit (ii) Cost borne by the farmers (iii) Sharing between the two  

7  How  are  the  raw materials  supplied  to  the unit?  Please  (i)   Raw form without any primary processing 

110  

tick the correct choice.   by the farmers at the village level  (ii)  After  some  primary  processing  by  the farmers themselves at the villages (iii)  After  some  primary  processing  at  the village levels by some third party (iv)  After  some  primary  processing  by  the Company at the villages 

8  If  raw materials  are  procured  directly  from  the  farmers under a formal contract, what are the key features of the backward linkages? 

1.2. 3. 4. 5. 

9  Has the setting up of the unit provided an assured market to the concerned farmers for their produce? 

Yes / No If  yes,  please  narrate.  If  no,  please  indicate the reasons:     

10  Did  the  setting  up  of  the  unit  directly  resulted  in  the introduction  of  some  new  crop  (crop  diversification)  in the covered villages? 

Yes / NoIf yes, please indicate the new crop/s & area     Crop                         New Area (Acres)     

11  Were  the  farmers  inducted  into  a  new  type  of  crop  for supply to the unit  

Yes/ No If yes, what is the type of crop introduced?   

12  Does  the  crop  have  other  avenues  of  sale  besides  the unit. 

Yes/ No  

13  If answer  to  item 12 above  is No, did  the  farmer have any  feeling of  insecurity/ risk  in   taking up new type of crop? 

Yes/ No

14  If  answer  to  above  is  Yes  what  are  the  factors  that helped him overcome the feeling of insecurity. 

12  If the unit did not result in crop diversification, how were the  concerned  farmers marketing  their  products  before the unit came up? 

Narration:     

13  If there  is a formal backward  linkage with the farmers,  is the Company providing any type of extension service like credit, information, seeds, fertilizers, technical know‐how, insecticides, etc.?   

Please specify:

111  

14  What  approximate % of  the  total marketable  surplus of the farmers is procured by the unit?   

   % 

15  If  it  is  less  than  75%, where  are  the  farmers  selling  the balance produce? 

(i) Local APMC/Society: (ii) Directly to Other Processors (iii) Directly to traders/agents (iv) Other (pl specify)   

16  Has the marketing tie‐up with the unit encouraged more farmers in the area to approach the same or other units in the area for similar arrangement? 

Yes / No If yes, details.     

17  Does  the  unit  provide  any  kind  of  training  or  skill upgradation inputs to the farmers? 

Yes / No If yes, specify.     

18  If yes, has  such a  training  /  skill upgradation helped  the farmers  in  increasing  productivity  /  producing  better quality  /  adopt  better  and  more  environment‐friendly methods of production?    

Yes / No If yes, please specify the benefits.    

19  Has the setting up of the unit resulted  in higher  incomes to the farmers for their produce?  

Yes / No

20  If yes, the details please    

Narration:

 

 (Signature of the Farmer interviewed)                         (Signature of the Interviewer) 

     Name & Village:                    Name & Designation: 

     Contact Phone Numbers:                   Contact Phone Numbers: 

Date:                Place: 

Name & Designation of the SFAC Coordinator:  

Contact Numbers: Mobile No. 

   

112  

ANNEXURE‐IVZone wise, State wise, year wise distribution of Sanctioned Projects under VCAS

Zone States 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Total

West Zone

Maharashtra 20 16 18 30 29 113

Gujarat 7 1 8 3 2 21

Goa 0 0 0 0 1 1

South Zone

Karnataka 11 9 17 12 7 56

Tamil Nadu 9 4 8 13 9 43

Kerela 0 11 5 7 1 24

Andhra Pradesh 3 3 1 4 4 15

North Zone

Himachal Pradesh 1 6 4 6 7 24

Rajasthan 0 0 1 0 8 9

Uttar Pradesh 2 1 0 1 28 32

J&K 3 4 3 1 3 14

Uttrakhand 0 0 6 1 5 12

Haryana 1 1 1 1 7 11

Punjab 1 1 0 1 1 4

North East

Assam 0 0 4 0 3 7

Manipur 3 0 0 1 0 4

Nagaland 2 0 0 1 0 3 Arunachal Pradesh 1 1 0 1 0 3

Meghalaya 2 0 0 0 0 2

Mizoram 0 0 0 0 1 1

Central Zone

Madhya Pradesh 1 0 1 1 1 4

Chhattisgarh 0 0 0 0 1 1

Eastern Zone

West Bengal 1 0 0 0 2 3

Orissa 0 0 0 1 0 1

Bihar 0 0 0 0 1 1

Total 68 58 77 85 121 409  

   

113  

ANNEXURE‐VSanctioned Unit under VCAS by Activity

Activity No. of Projects

Activity No. of Projects

Misc. Fruits & Veg. 67 Sweet/ Baby Corn 2

Cold Storage 66 Pepper (1) Tea (1) 2

Mango 35 Horticulture Crops 2

Cashew Nut 35 Lavender Oil 2

Grape Export/Cold Storage 21 Ginger 1

Coconut (20) Coconut shell charcoal (1) 21 Vermi Compost 1

Poly House (Floriculture) 20 Patchouli (Medicinal Plant)

1

Onion & Garlic Dhy. 14 Vanilla curing 1

Mushroom 14 Lemon Grass 1

Raisin 10 Tissue Culture Laboratory

1

Pickles/Sauces/Jam 9 Anti Cancer drug 1

Gherkin 9 Banana Ripening 1

Herbal Extracts 9 Cardamom 1

Winery 7 Chicory 1

Misc. Spices 7 Nutmeg/pepper oil 1

Fisheries 7

Tapioca Roots 7

Peas 6

Guar Gum 6

Potato Chips 4

Pineapple 3

Bamboo 3

Pomegranate 3

Honey 3

Aloe Vera 2

Walnut 2

Total 390 19

Total No of units= 490

114  

ANNEXURE‐VIProceeding of State Level Consultation held at Bhopal and Bhubaneswar

State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development, held at Hotel Jahanuma Palace, Bhopal, on 27 February, 2012

Brief Note on the Proceedings

A State level workshop as above was organized by Nabcons on behalf of SFAC as a part of the ongoing evaluation of the VCA scheme being implemented by SFAC during the XI Plan. The primary objective of the meet was to obtain views and feedback on the scheme from various stakeholders like banks, govt. officials and promoter organizations. The actual programme schedule and list of the participants as well as the background note circulated to ht eparticipants are attached. Besides the list, representatives from the Nabcons, New Delhi, Nabcons HO and the NABARD RO were present to participants and facilitate the event. A report on the meet is as under.

1. The meet was started with the welcome remarks by Shri Munish, GM, Nabcons, HO who briefly described the programme objective after which each participants introduced him self.

2. Shri Mukesh Singhai, GM, NABARD, Bhopal addressed the participants on the importance of credit in investments and capital formation in agriculture in general and in promotion of agroprocessing in particular and touched upon low off take of credit in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

3. Shri D. Sharma, AGM, Central Bank of India (SLBC convenor Bank) dwelt on the lopsided and low growth of credit and lack of focus on agribusiness in the State. He cited the case of a farmer who took up aonla cultivation in a big way, but was in distress because there is no avenue to sell the produce. He emphasized that such pockets of cultivation / plantations may be identified by SFAC and given special attention to promote processing units in their vicinity.

4. Thereafter Shri T.K. Hazarika, DGM, Nabcons made a PowerPoint presentation on the VCA scheme and provided necessary clarification to the participants. This was followed by presentation on the terms and reference of the evaluation study being undertaken by Nabcons and the issues that required to be given special attention and recommendation / suggestions by the participants.

5. The above sessions generated tremendous response and spontaneously one after the other the participants stared toughing the issues at random. With a best utilize the time and give opportunity to all in a focused way, the participants were divided into three groups to specially focus on the allotted aspects. After one hour of discussions the groups came forward with their various suggestions which are summarized item-wise as under. a. VCA terms and conditions

i. SFAC should first appraise the proposal and issue sanction for VCA or LOI so that the

entrepreneur can then approach the bank. ii. 5% of the VCA amount be allowed to be retained by the entrepreneur at the repayment

stage for prompt repayments of loan. iii. Cost of DPR preparation by CAs may also be reimbursed to the entrepreneur.

b. Review of cap on TFO

115  

The cap on TFO may be suitably lowered from the present Rs. 50 lakh (Rs. 25 lakh for NER etc) depending upon the position in the state, region and the category of entrepreneurs etc. to between Rs. 10 and Rs. 25 lakhs.

c. Guarantee cover SFAC may provide or link the units with some sort of credit guarantee on the lines of CGFT-MSE to the extent of Rs. 100 lakh in respect of Commercial Banks and Rs. 50 lakhs for RRBs.

d. Promotion of new units i. Most of the bankers expressed lack of any prior knowledge about the VCA scheme in

the absence of any publicity / awareness for the scheme. Some were not even aware of that State SFAC was in existence. The scheme requires publicity through newspapers, radio and TV channels.

ii. Sensitization meetings on the scheme may b organized for the banks and help of local NGOs / agencies may be taken to create necessary awareness / provide guidance about the scheme among / to the farmers.

iii. Some sort of interest subsidy may be considered for new units. iv. The progress may be reviewed at the DLCC and the BLBC level meetings. v. Success stories be developed and the farmers be given exposure on the agro-processing

activities.

e. VCA vis a vis schemes of NHB etc There was no specific suggestion on this.

f. Extending the scheme to RRB etc. The VCA scheme may be extended to RRBs, Pvt. Commercial Banks and Cooperative Banks beginning with the RRBs. NBFCs were not favoured because their orientation being mostly urban.

6. After discussion on the suggestions made by the groups, the NABARD RO made a brief presentation on the credit scenario on in the State in the agriculture sector and horticulture in particular, underlining the low off take vis a vis the national level to draw attention to need for steps to improve the situation.

Thereafter Shri T. K. Hazarika summed up the proceedings and thanked all those who had contributed to success of the meet.

*****

116  

List of Participants

S.No. Name Designation Department / Organization

1. R. P. Singh, Manager Dena banks, R.O. Bhopal

2. D. K. Taneja Chairman Madhya Bharat Gramin Bank, SAGAR

3. K. Mohan Rao Chairman Vidisha Bhopal RRB

4. Birendra Kumar Chairman Jhabua Dhar KGB

5. R. R. Rahi Program Officer N.C.T. Chhidwara, MP

6. Pramel Gupta Resource Manager - North VRUTTI

7. Amuja Kumar Agri Business Marketing Officer

Canara Bank

8. Sanjay Kumar Senior Manager Canara Bank

9. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari Manager (Agri) Corporation Bank

10. Anand Kumar Bhaskar Assistant Manager Indian Overseas Bank

11. Narendra Kumar Khare Lead District Manager Bank of India

12. Lalit L Samtari LDM, Indore Bank of India

13. Sushil Mishra Manager (Agri) IDBI Bank

14. Mohammed Fareed Uddin

Manager *Agri) IDBI Bank.

15. J. P Gupta Assistant Manager Sharda Gramin Bank, SATNA

16. Sourabh Vyas Programme Officer Gramin Vikas Trust, Jhabua

17.

18. V. S. Breli Chief Manager Syndicate Bank, RO Bhopal

19. Subodh Kumar Beohar Manager Agri Dept. SBI, LHO Bhopal

20. A. S. Khan Chief Technical Officer SBI, LHO

21. Saurabh Jhavar Head Finance Jain Mittal & Associates

22. C. M. Sharma Coordinator Manthan Gramin Evam Samaj Seva Samiti, Bhopal

23. J. S. Singh State Coordinator Mahatma Gandhi Pratishthan

24. Dr. Anand Singh Executive Officer MP State Livestock Corporation

25. R. P. Singh Dhillan Chief Manager Punjab & Sind Bank Z.O.

26. Ajeya Prasad Manager Punjab & Sind Bank Z.O.

117  

27. Rakesh Mehra Manager MP State Agro and Dev. Corp. Pvt. Ltd., SFAC – BPL

28. Vajubhai G. Dodio Director Samarpan Rural Development Foundation

29. S. P. Dixit Director SRDF

30. Laxman Muketi Proprietor G.D. Spiece & Veg. Seeds.

31. S. C. Acharya Director Varul Consultant Pvt. Ltd.

32. C. A. Pawan Kumar Jain Parnter Pawan Kumar Jain & AHO.

33. K. K. Tiwari Advisor L T Group

34. Pramaya Bahl Programme Manager Gramin Vikas Trust

35. Yogesh Dwivedi Theme Manager ASA Bhopal

36. Rabindra Nath Integrator PRADAN

118  

Groups-wise Issues discussed and Recommendations

A. Group-I Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

1) Revising / Refining VCA terms and conditions 2) Review of CAP on TFO 3) Whether SFAC should guarantee for groups that cannot offer collateral. Recommendations: a. SFAC should first appraise the proposal and issue sanction for VCA or LOI so that the entrepreneur

can then approach the bank. b. 5% of the VCA amount to be retained by agripreneurs as incentive for prompt repayment. c. Expenses incurred by the agripreneurs for preparation of DPR through CAs may be reimbursed. d. Cap on TFO may be reduced to Rs. 10 lakh for individuals and Rs. 25 lakh for others. e. SFAC may consider issue of guarantee for term loans on the lines of CGTMSE. f. Progress of SFAC Scheme may be reviewed at District level by DCC. g. Selection of entrepreneurs may be from production clusters. h. SFAC may consider setting up of a task force on the lines of KVIC and PMEGP for location,

appraisal and forwarding of proposals. i. Marketing support from SFAC and related marketing agencies / departments will in still confidence

in the agripreneurs. B. Group-II Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

1) Promotion of farmers’ groups / enterprise. 2) SFAC presence. 3) VCA scheme vis-à-vis subsidy scheme of NHB / MoFPI, etc. Recommendations: a. SFAC to stand as guarantor for first generation agripreneurs / FPOs. b. More sensitization programmes required for banks and other stakeholders. c. SFAC may interact with NGOs involved in agriculture and other areas in respect of implementation

of its scheme. d. VCA should be sanctioned prior to sanction of term loan.

C. Group-III Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

1) Steps to promote the scheme. 2) Explaining the scheme to RRBs / Coop. Banks / Pvt. Banks / NBFCs. Recommendations: a. The scheme requires publicity through newspapers, radio and TV channels. b. Involvement of NGOs for creating awareness about the scheme. c. Interest subsidy to a limited extends to be considered for select units. d. Success stories to be developed and farmers to be given exposure on agro-processing activities.

*****

119  

State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development, held at Hotel Suryansh, Bhubaneswar on 14 March 2012

Brief Note on the Proceedings

1. The captioned State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agri-Business Development was organized by NABARD Consultancy Services (NABCONS) on behalf of the Small Farmers’ Agri-business Consortium (SFAC), New Delhi as apart of the ongoing Evaluation Study of the VCA Scheme. The participants included S/Shri R. L. Jamuda, Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha; G.R.Chintala, Chief General Manager & Principal Consultant NABARD/ NABCONS, New Delhi, B. M. Patnaik, GM NABARD, Odisha RO; T.K.Hazarika, DGM, NABCONS, Zonal Office, New Delhi; Shri D. Bhuyan, Program Coordinator, SFAC, New Delhi; Senior officials from Banks / major State Govt. Line Deptts., representatives from NGOs & Farmers’ Clubs and representatives from agripreneurs of the state. A list of participants is enclosed.

2. The programme was formally inaugurated by lighting the ceremonial lamp by Shri R.L.Jamuda, Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Agriculture, Govt. of Odisha. Earlier, presenting the welcome address, Shri B.M. Patnaik, GM NABARD/ NABCONS, Odisha RO briefly touched upon the program objective, which he said was primarily to provide a forum to the stake holders of the scheme to share their thoughts and experiences and to find out reasons for low off take of the VCAS in the state. He also explained how the consultation could provide useful inputs to the study and could thereby contribute significantly to the refinement of the scheme during 12th plan and enable to make the same more effective. Shri G.R.Chintala, CGM NABARD and Principal Consultant NABCONS, New Delhi while presenting his key note address dwelt on the role of agri-business in adding prosperity to the rural economy and importance of the VCAS in promoting agribusiness in the country. He expressed disappointment to the fact that the states in the eastern region like Odisha, in spite of having tremendous potential for agribusiness development, have failed to make best use of the schemes available for the purpose.

3. Delivering his inaugural address, Shri R. L. Jamuda outlined the priorities of the state govt. and said that a lot needed to be done to improve the condition of farmers. He expressed disappointment that while two-third of the population was dependent on agriculture, the contribution of agriculture to the state domestic product was hardly 18%. The enhancement of productivity of the sector was thus a major challenge. Commenting on the various measures initiated by the govt., he informed that the year 2012 was being declared as the year of horticulture and for the first time the allotted budget under National Horticultural Mission (NHM) was utilized fully during the current year. He further informed that the Agriculture Deptt. had been giving major thrust on farm mechanization and creation of post-harvest infrastructure including cold chain to reduce crop losses and with a view to ensuring better price to farmers. He further informed that the state had enormous potential for development of agri-business but blamed the gap in communication between farmers and entrepreneurs on the one side and the institutions supporting agri-business on the other, as the main factor responsible for the sector not getting the required push. He expected the hope that the deliberations of the consultation would be useful to identify reasons for slow progress of the Venture Capital Assistance Scheme and will be able to come out with suitable recommendations which, he said, would help the Govt. to refine the policies suitably.

4. After the inaugural address, Shri D. Bhuyan, Program Coordinator, SFAC, New Delhi spoke briefly on the background and the salient features of the VCA Scheme. Shri Bhuyan’s address was supplemented by a power point presentation on the VCA Scheme by Shri T. K. Hazarika,

120  

DGM, NABCONS, which covered the status of implementation of VCAS during XI plan, the scheme’s geographical coverage as also its activity-wise and agency-wise spread. He also elaborated briefly on the terms of reference of the Evaluation Study of the VCAS and invited the the participants to offer their view points and suggestions.

5. The interactions that followed immediately thereafter were moderated by Shri B.M. Patnaik, GM, NABARD. Those who spoke included S/Shri K.C.Goyal, DGM, SBI; Om Kar, Managing Director, APICOL (State Nodal Agency for VCAS), Aurobindo Bhowmik, Chairman, Boitamari Gramin Bank; Laxman Kr. Palatasingh, Faculty Member, IMAGE, Bhubaneswar, Dr. B.P. Mishra, I/C Agro Enterprise Cell, Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Govt. of Odisha; K. Behera, Former Director of Hort., Govt. of Odisha & Secy., LALL, Jagatsinghpur district and others.

6. Shri K.C. Goyal, DGM, SBI in his remarks indicated that SBI would be most willing to participate in the scheme. He however, suggested that for better results SFAC should have an office in Bhubaneswar, so that there was proper coordination and decision making was prompt. He further opined that whenever a case was rejected the Bank Branch as well as the entrepreneur should be informed by SFAC about the reasons for the same. His two other suggestions were regarding simplification of the procedure and possible loan tie-up.

7. Shri Om Kar, Managing Director, APICOL, Bhubaneswar, the State Nodal Agency for VCAS presented a brief account of the efforts made by the agency to popularize the VCA scheme in the state. He informed that lack of adequate awareness at bank as well as entrepreneur’s level was a major reason for low off take of the scheme in Odisha. He further observed that Bank branches also lack specific guidelines from their controlling offices, which at times come on the way of sanctioning of a scheme and results in delay. Shri Kar was further of the view that Central SFAC may tone up their communication channel with the state agency and the reasons for rejection of a proposal may be made known to the state agency. He further informed that 9 proposals since forwarded to SFAC, New Delhi were awaiting sanction.

8. Shri Aurobindo Bhowmik, Chairman, Boitamari Gramin Bank speaking on behalf of the RRBs said that the RRBs have since changed. The amalgamated RRBs are now equally strong as a commercial bank and in view of their grass root presence, are in a better position to cater to the new generation entrepreneurs. He strongly advocated inclusion of RRBs in the list of eligible institutions for channelizing VCA. He further suggested that SFAC may make some annual allocation of targets state wise and there may be a system of periodic review and follow-up.

9. After the general discussion and interactions, three separate panels were constituted from among the participants. Each panel or group was given a few specified issues covering the ToR of the VCA Study. Following deliberations among the members in the group, each group/panel came out with specific recommendations on the ToRs referred to them, which were then presented before the House for final acceptance. The panel/group wise details of issues given, composition of group/panel and their recommendations are given overleaf :

121  

Groups-wise Issues discussed and Recommendations

D. Group-I Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

1) Scope/usefulness of extending the VCA Scheme to FIs other that PSU Banks 2) Need for specific incentives to Banks for ensuring their better participation in implementation of the

scheme 3) What should be the cap under the VCAS? Whether the present cap on investment for various

categories of investors/regions is adequate? 4) What should be done for timely grounding of a project under VCAS and to cut down delays in

implementation? 5) Any other suggestions for increasing the effectiveness of the VCAS? Recommendations: a. The assistance under the VCAS may be channelized through RRBs, Co-op Banks and other Pvt.

Banks besides the PSU Banks. b. The Banks should have a say in identification of the beneficiary under the scheme. No other incentive

is required. c. The cap on investment may be reduced to Rs. 25 lakhs. Odisha may be treated at per with the ER

states in the matter of eligibility of units being assisted under the scheme d. A committee of select Bankers, LDM, DDM, NABARD, select Line Deptts. including Distt. Level

Officer of Directorate of Horticulture, Distt. Administration and Representative of SFAC may be formed at district level for identification of agripreneur, scrutiny and selection of proposals. The DCC may regularly review the progress of the scheme at periodic intervals.

E. Group-II Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

1) Adequacy of incentives / interventions required for making the scheme more attractive. 2) Reasons for slow off take of VCAS in the State. 3) Role of State SFAC and other related institutions. Recommendations: a. Need to creating more awareness on information / incentives of the scheme among primary producers

/ agripreneurs. b. Online information must be made more simpler to enable the rural people to make more use of it. c. The quantum of VCA may be increased to 25% of the total project cost. d. Transportation subsidy / vehicle incentive need to be considered for long distance producers. e. Capital investment subsidy approach to be adopted by SFAC. f. Simplification of procedure of documents at Bank / SFAC level. g. Rate of interest for agri-business projects must be less than 10%. h. The eligible institutions under the scheme may include private sector commercial banks, cooperative

banks and regional rural banks. i. Training and capacity building support to the officials of line departments, progressive farmers. j. Creating a cadre are group of master trainers at District / State level by SFAC / other institutions. k. Proper linkage of SFAC with Zonal Technology Management and Business Planning and

Development Unit (BDP), ATMA at District level. F. Group-III Terms of Reference/Issues posed before the Group

122  

1) Adequacy of incentives / interventions required for making the scheme more attractive. 2) Reasons leading to low off take of the scheme in Odisha and other Eastern States. 3) Additional activities need to be covered. 4) Role & Steps needed to be taken by State SFAC.

Recommendations: a. Focused attention to be given for Odisha as there as no improvement during the last 5 years by setting

up of Regional office of SFAC in Odisha, include activities such as Sericulture, Dairy and Poultry. b. Inclusion of private sector banks, regional rural banks as eligible institutions. c. Adopt the format of project, appraisal and disbursement as in the case of NHP. d. NABCONS as coordinator for product development facility. e. Popularize the schemes of SFAC through NABARD DDM at District level. f. Placement of advertisements, banners etc. at banks branches. g. Review of SFAC schemes by the District Consultative Committee. h. Publication of Checklists for various schemes. i. Cluster approach to be followed for establishing agri-business units. j. Coordination with other agencies.

The program ended with a vote of thanks offered by Shri S. K. Nanda, Associate Consultant and Nodal Officer, NABCONS, Bhubaneswar.

123  

State Level Consultation on Venture Capital Assistance Scheme for Agribusiness Development held at 

Bhubaneswar ,Odisha on 14 March 2012 

List of Participants  

S.No. Name Designation Department / Organization

1.   M.P Mishra Chief manager (Rural) Zonal Office, State Bank of India

2.   B.C Dash Manager SLBC

3.   Rajbir Singh Deputy General Manager RO, Oriental Bank of Commerce

4.   R.N Senapaty Senior Manager Zonal Office, Andhra Bank

5.   J.B.Dey Chief Manager Regional Office, Union Bank

6.   Kissrod Kumar Officer IDBI Bank

7.   Amit Mohanty Officer IDBI Bank

8.   Dr. B.P Mishra DAFP

9.   Dr.B.Dash Director AH & VS

10.   Dr. S.C Pannas Officer NHB

11.   Laxman Kumar Patal Singh Faculty Member IMAGE, BBSR

12.   Dr. P K Banga Director BBSR

13.   C K Pal Consultant Shreyanmas Progressive Consultancy Pvt Ltd

14.   Subhnansa Udgata CEO Shreyanmas Progressive Consultancy Pvt Ltd

15.   Biswa Ranjan Nayaak District Secretary Odisha Krushak Mandal

16.   Kalicharan Marondi Dulal

17.   Sandeep Kumar

18.   Santhosh KU Barva Utkal Krushak Club

19.   Kshetramohan Prehena Secretary LALL

20.   Santosh Kumar Dash President Jaganaath Framers Club

21.   Arun Kumar Khdanju Facilitator Suraksha

22.   Subhash Kumar Pradhan Representative Jaimatadi Farmers Producers Company

23.   Purna Ch Majni Agri Fish Business

24.   D. P Povdhy Senior Consultant

25.   S.N Biswal Consultant Agragamee

26.   Pridarshy Sadngi Consultant PSD Consultancy Pvt Ltd

124  

27.   Aswin KU Pati Blarwone Janakalyan Krishak

28.   Dr. P C Mohanty Manager Bank of India

29.   D C Mihapatna Manager Bank of India

30.   Auribindo Bowmich Chairman Baitarani Gramya Bank

31.   S M Mishra Assistant General Manager RBI

32.   Sinalisa Sahoo Manager Punjab National Bank

33.   M P Pande Senior Manager Canara Bank

34.   U K Roy Officer Kalinga Gramya Bank

35.   A C Kunda Manager Allahabad Bank

36.   Om Kar Managing Director APICOR

37.   Mahesh Mahapati Representativ e NGO – Adhar Jagat Sikshan

38.   Maydesh Sidhi Representative NGO - Narasahi

39.   Dilip Kumar Representative NGO

40.   Biranchi Narayan Representative NGO

41.   Siri Arun Kushuahoo Representative NGO, Chakdolla

42.   Pramod das OPDSC

43.   G K Sarvegar Officer UCO Bank

44.   Saurav Representative NGO

45.   Debnanada Bhauja Dy. Director Directorate of Fisheries

46.   Dr. G K Tripaty Lecturer Animal Husbandry & Vet. Sciences

Corporate Office3rd Floor, C-Wing, NABARD HO Building Zonal Office

NABARD Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd.

3rd Floor, C Wing, NABARD HO BuildingPlot No. C-24, G-BlockBandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East)Mumbai – 400051Website: www.nabcons.comEmail: nabcons@nabard.org

1st Floor, NABARD Tower24 Rajendra Place

New Delhi – 110125email: nabcons.nd@nabard.org