Kenya: Central Kenya Dry Area Smallholder and Community Services Development Project

Transcription

1 Kenya: Central Kenya Dry Area Smallholder and Community Services Loan No. 7-KE Project Id. 111 Board Date 07 December 2000 Effectiveness Date 01 July 2001 Original Closing Date 31 December 2008 Final Closing Date 30 June 2011 Total Project Cost US$(M) US$18.08 million IFAD loan US$(M) US$10.91 million Cofinanciers (if any) Belgian Survival Fund (BSF): US$.10 million Implementing Agency Ministry of Finance and Planning Principal Components To achieve its objectives, the project will have six components: (i) primary health care and domestic water supply; (ii) water development services; (III) agricultural services; (iv) group development services; (v) PAI and (vi) project management and coordination. Project Performance Relevance Effectiveness The CKDAP was designed as a multi sectoral project and had its origin from the former Nyeri Dry Area Smallholder Community Services (NDAP). The project was designed and implemented within the framework of the District Focus for Rural Development (DFRD) strategy and it has been sensitive to the national policy frameworks and sectoral policies in the specialized components. It also emphasized a bottom-up and decentralization-based approach and had a clear community development-driven approach, supported by group-based activities. Project's interventions with relation to water and health have been extremely relevant towards addressing nationally recognized objectives and the target population's real needs. In terms of relevance of approaches, during the first three years the project was affected by some inappropriate implementation arrangements which hindered its smooth implementation. Thus, CKDAP was meant to be based on integrated implementation arrangements, whereby all the different components were expected to plan and implement activities within each of the selected sub location simultaneously in order to combine benefits from each component. However, during the first three years, the implementing departments never received funds at the same time thus making integrated implementation arrangements impossible. In addition, coordinating implementation of a district based Programme from Nairobi by the project coordination unit (PCU) proved ineffective. Another issue concerned duplication of coordination infrastructures at district level, as having two structures at the district level (District Project Coordinating Committee-DPCC and District Project Coordinating Unit-DPCU) was not necessary. This situation necessitated some main changes and during the re-engineering process in 200, some of the initial project implementation arrangements were changed, which improved project's performance: i) the PCU was relocated from Nairobi to Nyeri and changed its name to PMU (project management unit); ii) the same PMU was made up of sector technical staff unlike the PCU that was constituted by the National Coordinator, Project Accountant, and Monitoring and Evaluation Officers; iii) the Ministry of State for Planning, National Development and Vision 2030 (MSPNDV 2030) as the Lead Agency (LA) was mandated to disburse funds to the project unlike the in the previous arrangements where the different line ministries were disbursing funds to their implementing departments at the District. A further issue with project design was the allocation of US$.6 million to the Poverty Alleviation Initiative (PAI) which failed to take off due to lack of adequate institutional framework within which it would have been operated. Thus in 2008, the funds allocated to this component (US$6 million) were reallocated to the other components during the extension period, with 32% being allocated to Domestic Water Supply. During its first three years, CKDAP performance has been affected by weak coordination, late and irregular release of funds by different participating ministries which resulted in non-completion of planned activities, lack of integration among components, hurriedly done activities usually at close of financial year, artificial shortage of funds and weak monitoring and evaluation (M&E). All these issues affected the start of health, water and agricultural projects at community level, leading to poor service delivery to beneficiaries. To address all these challenge, a re-engineering process was conducted in 200 and the project went through a new arrangement process which improved project coordination and management as well as its performance. With regard to the objective of providing

2 basic primary health care and domestic water supply for the most disadvantaged communities, overall the project has been effective. As far as the agricultural services are concerned, the project's achievements have been only fair, as drought effects were experienced more frequently during the project period. Delays in the budgetary provisions from IFAD as well as delays to mobilise the foreseen community contribution of 30% also caused delays in project implementation. High capital cost of water infrastructure investments also posed challenges to achieving the project goals. In addition, water sector reforms created a staff shortage with a lot of the implementing staff deployed to the water boards and other water management authorities and the linkage between the project and the new water institutions was not properly defined. Efficiency The project was approved in Dec and it became effective in July The project periods were reviewed and extension granted to 31 Dec and 30 June 2011, effectively bringing the project life to nine years (against the initial seven years). During its first three years, the project faced many challenges. Coordinating a district based programme from Nairobi proved ineffective. Ministries did not release funds on time, and when released the funds arrived at different times. It was just impossible to execute a well-coordinated integrated project. This was a period of complete non-implementation, which culminated to a loss of about 2 years, thus making to four years the time of effective project's implementation. Another element that constrained project's efficiency was the PAI funds tied for long only to be reallocated two years to project completion. This curtailed the extent of physical outputs that were realised. By the end of May 2011, project's overall expenditure amounted to 87%. It is worth noting that a significant proportion of this amount (36%) was spent on the project management and coordination of the project activities. According to the PCR, the time factor eroded on the efficiency of the project to the extent that effects and impacts of physical outputs to the livelihoods of the targeted community were delayed. In some cases, the project completed while some infrastructural works were ongoing implying that the benefits of such facilities had not yet been realised at the closure of the project. 3 Project Performance Partner Performance IFAD Cooperating Institution Government IFAD has been responsible for some project's design flaws. In addition, the MTR was undertaken in 2006 which was beyond the envisaged time for conduction the review, which delayed critical decision on some aspects of project implementation, e.g. the tied up PAI funding and timing in implementation of irrigation projects. Although IFAD had assisted the project in implementing policies and carried out yearly supervision missions to the project, from 2008 through its Direct Supervision IFAD achieved higher and more direct interaction with the project, which contributed to facilitate project implementation. No objections and processing of withdrawal applications also improved. Finally, the PCR mentions a rigidity in the reallocation of loan resources at the beginning of the project, which became more flexible with IFAD supervision. The United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) conducted various supervision mission which improved project performance through better targeting, speeding up of financial flows and pointing out shortcomings to the relevant authorities. However, during UNOPS administration and supervision, there were frequent delays in withdrawal approvals. UNOPS also relied highly on consultants whose involvement was more of a routine rather than demand oriented. The GOK contributed to its part of counterpart funding and greatly helped in the implementation of many recommendations of supervision missions. On the other hand, the government procurement procedures hindered the pace of project implementation, as being too lengthy and bureaucratic. Uncoordinated and late release of Authorities to Incur Expenditures (AIEs) also hampered coordinated implementation of the multi sectoral project in the earlier period. With regard to the Project Coordination Committee (PCC), this has instituted most of the implementation changes that took place during the project life and its frequent supervision missions greatly benefitted the project implementation. An observable challenge of PCC has been its limitation in terms of ensuring that the desk officers were given some form of predictable tenure for a predictable time during the project for purposes of smooth implementation. On the other hand, in the three early project period, coordination and management of project activities was weak right from the headquarters to districts due to inadequate capacity of the PCU with only three officers. They could not effectively manage and coordinate project activities while located far away in Nairobi. In addition, government officers charged with the implementation of CKDAP at the district and divisional level, were overstretched. The refurbished PMU made the implementation processes more efficient and effective, thus

3 providing the overall provincial support to the districts including planning, M&E and technical backstopping. The PSR mentions a poor performance on financial management and audit. NGO/Other The farmers' organization Dairy Goats Association of Kenya (DGAK) has linked the goat farmers to potential buyers and this enhanced marketing of dairy goats and their products. This assured farmers to get better breeds and also better prices for goats. KAI (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute) provided crop/fodder seeds such as tissue culture bananas grafted mangoes, cassava, sweet potato, etc. to CKDAP agriculture groups, conducted on farm trials through joint efforts with agricultural extension staff and promoted alternative source of fuel in form of Plastic Tube Digester (PTD) Biogas technology. Cofinancier(s) BSF/BFFS has satisfactorily provided its agreed counterpart funding. Combined Partner Performance The project benefitted from commendable support by all partners. No major issues have been identified. Rural Poverty Impact Household Income and Net Assets The dairy goat (milk production and sell of off-springs for breeding), selling of tissue culture bananas and improved poultry production due to vaccinations were the main drivers of improved household incomes in the project area. Communities have increased incomes which they use on education and other businesses. Acquisition of household assets among the target communities as revealed by the CKDAP Household Impact Survey has improved. Overall, the housing condition has improved with a shift towards adoption of modern roofing, flooring and walling. There has been also a general rising trend in household expenditure which is used as a proxy for general household income Natural Resources and Environment Human, Social Capital and Empowerment Ag. Productivity status. The project helped local people contribute to the protection and rehabilitation of natural resources and the environment. The project establishment of 278 tree nurseries for agroforestry and fruit tree contributed to the protection and rehabilitation of forests. Soil fertility improvement has been undertaken by farmers by practicing agro forestry and other soil fertility enhancement options. The 970 soil conservation structures greatly helped in protecting soil erosion. Environmental conservation through water harvesting and moisture retention technologies provided the means to increased production in dry land farming. Bio-gas demonstration units were also established, which were intended to save on firewood and thus protect excessive use of trees. The project had a positive impact in the area of group development and community empowerment. Project activities were largely premised on participation, volunteerism and community ownership through formed community groups. Actually, largely attributed to intense community sensitization and mobilization by the project, there has been a general increase in formation of groups during the , with over 109 groups being formed over the project period. As a result of project interventions, most groups in project areas had attained beneficial group management knowledge and skills such as undertaking regular elections, holding regular meetings, resources mobilization, conflict resolutions. This ensured that a majority of groups in project intervention areas were active and well prepared to undertake various project interventions under water, health, agriculture and income generating activities (IGA) areas. In terms of human capital, project's households benefitted from improved health, better diets and nutrition, improved hygiene and sanitation also deriving from better access to water. Health facility staff and community members were targeted for capacity building, which improved access to effective quality health services. In addition, there has been an increased access of health care services to an estimated 213,000 community members by making the services available nearer than they were before the project as well as an increased frequency of utilization of health care services by the members of the target communities, which led to a reduction of morbidity and mortality. As a result of the project's intervention, there have been improved crop and livestock production among target group farmers. Other activities included promotion of drought tolerant crops and fodder; upgrading of small stock; promotion of micro-irrigation technologies; poultry upgrading and vaccination, provision of planting materials; water harvesting technologies and soil and water conservation measures. As a result of the improvement of local goats through an upgrading program, milk production from goats has improved from 0. litres of milk from local goat breed to 2-3 litres of milk per day from crossbreds and pedigree goats. In addition, thanks to the vaccination of poultry promoted by the project, the survival rate of both local and improved poultry breeds has improved by over 70%. The project also intervened by training farmers to use methods and practices of beekeeping including harvesting technologies, modern hives and husbandry

4 techniques. The project also promoted improvement of crop production and the Tissue Culture Bananas (TCB) growing in the project area was one of the most successful agricultural activities promoted by the project. Pineapples and mangoes as well as tolerant crops e.g. cassava, sweet potato and drought tolerant beans and pigeon peas were encouraged and supported among smallholders farmers in the project area. The introduction of TCB in the whole project area has been very successful. However, the PCR highlights that unusually bad weather conditions affected most of the project area, which led to a reduced achievement in the agriculture and livestock component. Food Security The nutritional status of most rural smallholder involved in the project has improved significantly over the last five years when compared to the baseline year. This was particularly true for the elderly and for children below five years as well as school going ones. The number of meals has improved from an average of 1. meals to 3 balanced meals per day. According to the CKDAP household impact survey in 2010, the percentage of households that reported a continued hunger season (chronic food insecurity) throughout each year had declined from 6% in 2006 to % in 2010 in the CKDAP project zone. While there may be other factors contributing to the improved household food security situation across project districts, most farmers groups attributed this reduction to the new technologies in agriculture and livestock (e.g. water harvesting, tissue culture bananas, poultry vaccinations and upgrading, dairy goat development and introduction of drought tolerant crops by the project.) The higher milk production resulted in a greater quantity of milk for consumption. The introduction of drought tolerant crops brought diversity in their diets and improved food security and nutritional status, particularly of vulnerable members of the households. According to the PCR, despite the several interventions promoted by the project in order to improve beneficiaries' food security, the final impact has been significantly eroded by persistent drought that was experienced in the target areas. Agricultural Productivity and Food Security Inst. & Policies The CKDAP implementation approach was mainly through various forms of groups, namely: health groups, water users groups; agricultural development groups/common interest groups, savings and credit groups. The savings and credit groups remain largely active and have become a key feature in project areas in all districts. Savings and credit groups are community driven, have introduced friendly community-based financing systems, have a strict code of conduct which is enforced through regular meetings. Markets As far as this impact domain, the project established 60 enterprise based umbrella marketing groups, which helped market various high value crop and livestock enterprises such as grafted mangoes and tissue bananas. The idea of joint enterprise marketing group was innovative and helped such high value crops and livestock. Some issues were reported in the marketing of goat milk and honey, as for different reasons these two products still require considerable support in order to overcome some challenges which constrain their marketing. Project Impact Overarching Factors Innovation The CKDAP introduced innovative features in its strategies, development approaches, technical solutions and managerial aspects. Some of the innovative features included: i) creation of FDAC structures (Focal Development Area Committees); ii) enterprise-based umbrella marketing groups; iii) mainstreaming of vulnerable groups; iv) devolution of management structures; v) community participation in projects identification, planning and implementation; vi) introduction of new technologies (greenhouses, drought tolerant Replicability and Scalingup Innovation, Replicability and Scaling-up Sustainability and Ownership crops, dairy goats). The PCR does not provide much information on this domain. It mentions that some activities related to Primary Health Care (PHC) and agriculture extension services have been replicated in neighbouring communities. Moreover, community involvement in the project's identification, planning and implementation as promoted through the Participatory Rural Appraisal process is a replicable process to other communities. The project's community participatory process has enhanced community ownership of its interventions and to a large extent would help in ensuring CKDAP's sustainability in post- IFAD financing period. In terms of institutional sustainability, government line ministries are committed to the continuation of projects and services to the project beneficiaries in post project period. However, such officers at District and Divisional level have inadequate financial resources for follow up and further trainings of communities in those

5 areas. The government has provided various funds such as Constituency Development Funds (CDF), Local Authority Transfer Funds (LATF), Educational Bursaries, etc. for supporting social and economic activities such as at community level. With regard to project's interventions concerning the primary health care and water development, there are good prospects for sustainability. The same applies to the agriculture and livestockrelated activities, where common interest groups have developed strong links with government extension agents; private sector groups and other institutions to guarantee continuity of project activities and sustainability of benefits. Targeting According to its first design, the CKDAP intervened in selected areas (FDAs/Sub locations) considered worse off as guided by the poverty indices as ranked in the poverty mapping and assessment documents. Subsequently, during the re-engineering a more rigorous criteria was applied and ranking of the areas was done accordingly, thus ascertaining that the areas targeted by CKDAP were those economically and socially deserving. The project target group was classified as having the following characteristics: i) female headed households; ii) landless households and those with small plots of between 0.-2 ha; iii) families which rely on irregular casual labor; iv) orphans and unemployed youths of households; v) families with poor access to health facilities and domestic water supply. This target group was made of the vulnerable and food insecure households exposed to constant threat of hunger and malnutrition, lack access to basic facilities in health, unsafe drinking water, poor income earning opportunities and high risk to diseases. It is worth noting that during the project's implementation local communities mainstreamed vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, the very poor, disabled, orphans. Gender The CKDAP lacked an effective gender strategy, although an attempt was made at gender mainstreaming in project activities. This involved undertaking a gender analysis exercise in all FDAs and data was included in group register matrix. Focus has also been on implementing the affirmative action of ensuring representation of 30% women in decision making structures. Presently, most of the groups within the project area have shown an increase in women joining leadership positions, particularly in large water projects. Implementation of gender friendly technologies such as bicycles, toilet apertures and water lifting instruments and commercialization of kitchen gardens were other gender mainstreaming efforts within the project. Overall Performance Estimated number of beneficiaries PCR Quality Scope Quality Lessons The PCR is overall in line with the guidelines for project completion. An interactive stakeholder's workshop was held after the production of the draft PCR, which provided an opportunity for sharing the findings of the PCR. Some of the requested annexes are missing. The PCR has made a notable effort in presenting and analysing the project's main achievements and shortcomings. However, it would have benefitted from a shorter as well as more systematized version. Moreover, although the PCR makes reference to an Impact Survey carried out in 2010, its resulting data have not been fully used to assess the project's impact on the various domains. This section shows an in-depth reflection on some of CKDAP's positive and negative lessons which were learnt throughout the CKDAP project implementation period. Candour The PCR is objective and fairly critical is its assessment.