GPAF IMPACT PROPOSAL FORM (for Round 2)
The proposal documentation provides detailed information about your proposed project.
This information is used to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the initiative and will
ultimately inform the DFID funding decisions. It is very important you read the GPAF
Impact Window Guidelines for Applicants and related documents before you start
working on your Proposal to ensure that you understand and take into account the relevant
funding criteria. Please also consider the GPAF Impact Round 1 Proposals - Key
Strengths and Weaknesses document which was prepared following the appraisal of the
full proposals submitted to the first round of GPAF Impact. This document identifies the
generic strengths and weaknesses of proposals submitted in relation to the key
assessment criteria.
How: You must submit a Microsoft Word version of your Proposal and associated
documents by email to gpafimpact@tripleline.com. The Proposal Form should be
completed using Arial font size 12. We do not require a hard copy.
When: Proposal documentation must be received by Triple Line by: 23:59 (GMT) on 10th
January 2012. Proposal documents that are received after the deadline will not be
considered.
What: You should submit the following documents:
1. Narrative Proposal: Please use the form below, noting the following page limits:


Sections 1 – 7
Section 8
: Maximum of 15 (fifteen) A4 pages
: Maximum of 3 (three) A4 pages per partner
Please do not alter the formatting of the form and guidance notes. Proposals that exceed
the page limits or that have amended formatting will not be considered.
2. Logical Framework: All applicants must submit a full Logical Framework/Logframe and
Activities Log. Please refer to the GPAF Logframe Guidance and How-To-Note and use
the Excel logframe template provided.
3. Project Budget: All applicants must submit a full project budget with the proposal.
Please refer to the GPAF Impact Window Guidelines for Applicants, the Financial
Management Guidelines and the guidance notes on the GPAF Impact budget template (for
Round 2). The Excel document has three worksheets/tabs: Guidance Note; Budget; and
Budget Notes. Please read all guidance notes and provide detailed budget notes to justify
the budget figures.
4. Organisational Accounts: All applicants must provide a copy of their most recent (less
than 12 months after end of accounting period) signed and audited (or examined)
accounts.
5. Project organisational chart / organogram: All applicants must provide a project
organisational chart or organogram demonstrating the relationships between the key
project partners and other key stakeholders (please use your own format for this).
6. Project Schedule or GANTT chart: All applicants must provide a project schedule or
GANTT chart to show the scheduling of project activities (please use your own format for
this).
Please complete the checklist provided in section 9 before submitting your
proposal.
1
GLOBAL POVERTY ACTION FUND (GPAF) – IMPACT WINDOW PROPOSAL FORM
SECTION 1: INFORMATION ABOUT THE APPLICANT
1.1
Lead organisation name
Concern Worldwide UK
1.2
Main contact person
Name: Jane Adisu
Position: Head of International Support
Email: jane.adisu@concern.net
Tel: 0207 8011851
1.3
2nd contact person
Name: James Davey
Position: Country Director, Tanzania
Email: James.davey@concern.net
Tel: 255 22 270 0327
1.4
Please use this space to inform
of any changes to the applicant
organisation or Consortium
details
provided
in
your
Concept Note
SECTION 2: BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT
2.1
Concept Note Reference No.
IMP-02-CN-0923
2.2
Project title
Accelerated MDG1 impact by improving Food, Income,
and Governance (FIG) in Northwest Tanzania
2.3
Country(ies) where project is to Tanzania
be implemented
2.4
Locality(ies)/region(s)
country(ies)
2.5
Duration of grant request (in 36
months)
2.6
Project start date (month and July 2012
year)
2.7
Total project budget? In GBP £ 2,822,000
sterling
2.8
Total funding requested from £1,937,185
DFID in GBP sterling and as a %
of total project budget
69%
2.9
Year 1 funding requested from £647,987
DFID
2.10
Please specify the % of project Tanzania 100%
funds to be spent in each
project country
2.11
Total match funding and status (sources of match funding, amounts, and secured or
not secured) - Please enter match-funding details in the table below (add rows if
necessary)
within Ngara and Biharamulo
Northwest Tanzania
districts,
Kagera
Region,
MONTHS
2
Source of funding
Year 1 (£)
Year 2 (£)
Year 3 (£)
Total (£)
Concern Donations
250,881
296,487
337,447
884,815
Total (£)
250,881
296,487
337,447
884,815
Secured? (Y/N)
Y for Year 1
SECTION 3: FIT WITH GPAF IMPACT WINDOW
3.1
CORE SUBJECT AREA - Please identify between one and three core project focus areas
(insert '1' for primary focus area; '2' for secondary focus area and; '3' for tertiary focus area)
Agriculture
1
Health (general)
Appropriate Technology
HIV/AIDS / Malaria / TB
Child Labour
Housing
Climate Change
Income Generation
Conflict / Peace building
Justice
Core Labour Standards
Land
Disability
Livestock
Drugs
Media
Education & Literacy
Mental Health
Enterprise development
Reproductive Health / FGM
Environment
Rural Livelihoods
Fisheries / Forestry
Slavery / trafficking
Food Security
Water & sanitation
Gender
Violence against women/ girls/ children
Governance
2
3
Other: (please specify)
3.2
Which of the following Millennium Development Goals is the project contributing to (if
any)? - Please identify between one and three MDGs in order of priority (insert '1' for
primary MDG focus area; '2' for secondary MDG focus area; '3' for tertiary MDG focus area)
1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
1
2. Achieve universal primary education
3. Promote gender equality and empower women
2
4. Reduce child mortality
5. Improve Maternal Health
6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7. Ensure environmental sustainability
3
8. Develop a global partnership for development
None of the above (please explain in section 3.3)
3.3
Explain why you are focusing on these specific MDGs. Are the above MDGs “off track”
in the implementing countries? If possible please identify sub-targets within not just the
national context but also related to the specific geographical location for the proposed
project. Please state the source of the information you are using to determine whether or not
3
they are “off track”. How will this project support the national government’s commitment to
achieving identified MDGs? Your response should also inform section 4.4.
Concern Tanzania aims primarily to contribute to MDG 1 – poverty and hunger. In rural Mainland
Tanzania 37.6% of the population lives below the national basic needs poverty line 1 representing
little progress towards the MDG 2015 target of 20.4%. Sixteen percent of children are underweight
and 42% are stunted2 (MDG 2015 targets 14.4% and 23.3% respectively). Addressing poverty and
hunger in Ngara and Biharamulo districts, Kagera Region, Northwest Tanzania, will contribute to
achievement of MDGs. In Ngara, 34% of the population lives below the basic needs poverty line.3 4
In Biharamulo, the figure is 48% – 27.7% more than the national average and over double the MDG
target. Kagera has severe poverty rate of 58.4%, the second worst in the country, with incidence of
poverty at 76.2% (the 3rd worst in country).5 Ngara and Biharamulo are the poorest districts in this
isolated region.6 One key maintainer of poverty is under-nutrition. Malnutrition threatens economic
growth; reduces earning potential, impedes education, directly and indirectly leads to deaths among
women/children, and undermines other investments.7 Malnutrition is high in Kagera: underweight is
17.1% and stunting is 43.6%8. The causes of under-nutrition relate to low diet diversity and
quantity/quality, frequent child illness, and poor child feeding practices.
To ensure accelerated results on the impact level (MDG1) and outcome (see section 3.4) a focus
on MDG3 to promote gender equality and MDG7 to ensure environmental sustainability is essential.
The three MDGs are mutually beneficial and were selected because of their importance in rural
development and challenges faced in achievement. Inequality is a driver and maintainer of poverty.
While MDG3 is considered ‘achievable’9 at the national level, at the local level, this is not reflected
as female participation in formal village institutions and wage employment is extremely low due to
patriarchal traditions, low female education and lack of awareness among women of their
rights/abilities to contribute to development and be economically active (see section 4.4).With
respect to MDG7, rural water and sanitation is off track in Tanzania. By integrating with our EUfunded WASH programme, there will be triple benefit of maximising use of existing water
infrastructure and improving sustainable use of resources, improving household nutrition, and
effecting positive changes in gender dynamics,10 thus maximising gains in MDG1/ MDG3.11 In
addition, farmers highlight drought/floods as risks across our programming. Through training,
farmers will be able to mitigate risks and increase resilience to shocks.
Please list any of the DFID’s standard output and outcome indicators to which this
fund will contribute. Please refer to the Standard Indicators document on the GPAF
website. Note if stated here, these also need to be explicit in your logframe.
3.4
Level
Outcome
:
Outputs
Outcome/Output expected
Communities diversify and
expand their opportunities
for household development
1. Target communities
increasing and
diversifying agriculture
production and applying
nutrition knowledge
Indicator
1. % change in proportion of rural population below
national poverty line
2. Minimum dietary diversity
1. % of farmers trying specific technology advice from
extension systems on their farms
2. Change (%) in yields of major crops for target
communities
3. % of target households applying minimum dietary
1
HBS 2007: The Basic Needs Poverty Line is set at TZS 7,253 per 28 days per adult equivalent unit in 2000/1 prices; households
consuming less are unable to satisfy basic needs.
2
Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey, 2010
3
Tanzania Human Development Report 2005, 34%
4
According to Ngara District Council, livelihoods are deteriorating rapidly after the closure of the refugee camps in 2008 reducing UN
expenditure/work opportunities in the area
5
Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) 2010 Tanzania http://www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-povertyindex/mpi-country-briefings/ (international definitions usually result in higher amounts of poor compared to national poverty line)
6
‘Poverty in Kagera, Tanzania: Characteristics, Causes and Constraints’; PRUS Working Paper no. 42, Sussex university, UK
7
Investing in nutrition for national growth and prosperity in Tanzania. Development Partners Group on Nutrition, Tanzania, 2010.
8
Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey, 2010
9
MDG Progress Report, mid-way evaluation 2000-08, United Republic of Tanzania
10
Concern’s work on Domestic Plus in Nepal ‘Technology and Gender Dynamics in Domestic PLUS Approach within WASH
11
Our approach, which seeks to capitalise on the multiple usages of available water resources through economical use of wastewater
for a range of small-scale activities enables people to grow food, earn income, and eventually enhance the quality of their life.
4
diversity
2. Target communities
increasing household
incomes/assets
1. Annual growth in value added in agriculture and/or
livestock for target beneficiaries
2. Change (%) in households income from farm and
non-farm sources (disaggregated by gender)
3. % increase in number of local business enterprises
in target community
3. Governance structures in 1. Female active participation in community decisiontarget communities and
making
districts are improving
2. % of citizens satisfied their voice is heard by formal
management,
institutions (Men & women)
coordination and
3. % of target population with legally recognised form
regulations on
of a land tenure ( men and women)
development activities
SECTION 4: PROJECT DETAILS
4.1
ACRONYMS Please list all acronyms used in your application in alphabetical order and
explain them in full.
ANSAF Agricultural Non-State Actors Forum
DADP District Agricultural Development Plan
DRR Disaster risk reduction
CSO Civil society organisation
FFS Farmer field school
MUAC Mid-upper arm circumference
4.2
PCMS Programme cycle management system
QDS Quality declared seeds
QVGAMs Quarterly village general assembly
meetings
RBA Rights-based approach
SACCOS Savings and Credit Cooperative
Societies
WASH Water, sanitation, and hygiene
SUMMARY: maximum 5 lines Please provide a brief project summary including the overall
change(s) that the initiative is intending to achieve and who will benefit. Please be clear and
concise and avoid the use of jargon (This is for dissemination about the fund and should
relate to the purpose statement in the logframe).
The FIG initiative is an integrated approach to reduce hunger and improve livelihoods of the poorest
people in target districts. It will increase food production and improve nutrition by introducing new
techniques, knowledge, and better inputs. It will empower women economically/socially by access
to productive assets such as land, and increase in decision-making. Activities are designed to assist
communities to have their voices heard/priorities met by local government for long-term benefit.
4.3
PROJECT DESIGN PROCESS Describe the process of preparing this project proposal.
Who has been involved in the process and over what period of time? How have the intended
beneficiaries and other stakeholders been involved in the design? If a consultant or anyone
from outside the lead organisation and partners assisted in the preparation of this proposal
please describe the type of assistance provided.
Following Concern’s programme cycle management system (PCMS), a participatory contextual
analysis in the community was undertaken to assess needs and priorities of the target group in
order to set objectives for support. Communities, civil society organisation (CSO) partners, and local
government authorities (LGAs) have been key stakeholders in the design process since May 2011.
Technical advisers in Dublin and London have provided support and feedback. The programme
design is based on a rapid needs assessment with communities and partners, which involved an
assessment of nutritional status, using mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) measurement among
5
children aged 6-59 months; focus group discussions with a spread of the community in 25% of
target villages,12 and secondary data analysis, where it exists. The two LGAs and CSO partners
supplied information on their activities, priorities, and budgets in order for Concern Tanzania to feed
into the district priorities and plans in agriculture, value chain, land, and health. The programme has
utilised learning and recommendations from previous and on-going programmes in its design.
Please see sections 4.7 and 4.13 for learning. The location has been selected due to the needs
assessment and request from communities and LGAs13 to integrate activities with our current
WASH programming and will use water runoff for micro-irrigation and vegetable gardens –
techniques learned from other Concern countries.14 This integration is in Concern Tanzania’s
Country Strategic Plan 2011–15, is recommendation from WASH & livelihoods evaluations,15 and
based on recommended practices to integrate agriculture and nutrition.16
4.4
PROJECT RATIONALE (PROBLEM STATEMENT) Describe the context for the proposed
project? What specific aspects of poverty is the project aiming to address? What are the
causal factors leading to poverty and/or disadvantage? What gaps in service delivery have
been identified? How has your proposal considered existing services or initiatives? Why has
the particular project location(s) been selected and at this particular time? Please also refer
to your response to section 3.3 (fit with MDGs) when answering this section.
Over a third of the population lives in extreme poverty as defined by the Tanzanian Government, 17
and overall the majority of Tanzanians are poor – 88.5% live on less than $1.25 per day.18 One of
the major reasons is inadequate investment in rural areas, where three-quarters of the nation
depending on agriculture for income live.19 People in rural areas are far from supportive
infrastructure such as roads, markets, and health centres. More than half of smallholder farmers are
women; 74% of people engaged in agriculture are poor. The sector contributes around 25% of GDP
and smallholder farmers produce most of the food for the country. Any investment, therefore, into
meeting MDG1 in Tanzania must focus on agriculture; it is the major sector able to combat
poverty.20 However, the rain-fed sector is weak, unproductive, and unfavourable to poor farmers.21
Ngara and Biharamulo districts are isolated and are currently under-served by development
initiatives, with poverty levels reaching 48% in Biharamulo and food insecurity affecting a third of the
population, with lack of food diversification for basic nutrition.22 Accelerated efforts are needed in to
get on track with MDG1 targets.The programme will address food and income poverty. Through
country experience, we understand the causal factors, reinforced by Concern’s global
understanding of extreme poverty. Farmers suffer from the following barriers to economic and
health improvement:
Lack of skills and knowledge: Low levels of formal and informal education means small-scale
farmers lack the skills for agriculture, health, and enterprise. This leads to low production and
income, and lack of diversified diet, thus non-fulfilment of MDG1. Only 15% of the districts practise
improved farming skills.23 Farmers produce a small selection of crops such as bananas, reducing
diet diversification and affecting health of children. Concern assessed the districts in 2011 and
concluded that severe acute/global acute malnutrition are high and indicators for micronutrients and
maternal nutrition are extremely poor. A Concern MUAC survey found 19.3% of girls and 12.8% of
boys with acute malnutrition – showing strong gender disparity.
Lack of or low return on assets: Rural farmers, especially the most vulnerable people such as
women, sick, and disabled, lack access to productive assets or get low return on them, hampering
fulfilment of MDG1 and MDG7. Farmers often lack capacity to maximise resources, for instance
12
124 households were represented (50% female, 50/50 youth and adults
Concern Tanzania has been operating in the region since the refugee crisis of the mid-90s and has received requests.
Concern Tanzania refers to this approach as Domestic Plus.
15
Water and Environmental Health Programme 2007–10, endline report 2011
16
USAID’s Infant and Young Child Nutrition Project, Achieving Nutritional Impact and Food Security through Agriculture – Resources for
linking Agriculture, Food Security, and Nutrition, www.iycn.org
17
Household Budget Survey 2007, National Bureaux of Statistics
18
UN Human Development Index 2010
19
Household Budget Survey 2007, National Bureaux of Statistics
20
All figures above from: Public Interventions in Agriculture – with what implications on gender? Draft report, ANSAF 2011
21
Ibid
22
District Council assessment and MUAC assessment 2011
23
District Council and CSO assessment, 2011
13
14
6
water for irrigation, to ensure better return on their assets. The most productive asset is land; only
6% of the population owns a certificate of ownership despite the Village Land Act No 5 of 1999’s
entitlements. While land is available to farmers to use, competition for fertile/irrigated land is
intense. Lack of formal ownership can lead to land grabbing and repossession of women by in-laws
after death of their husband. Farmers in the two districts state they struggle to find credit, halting
investment in their livelihoods. While some crops that can earn money are cultivated (coffee,
bananas, cassava); value-chain activities are small; local markets are saturated by few products.
Markets across borders are not utilised; farmers lack skills on where/how to market their produce.24
Poor governance: Is a major causal factor in persistent poverty in rural Tanzania, which suffers
from lack of investment from central government and misallocation of funds. In the two districts,
District Agricultural Development Plan (DADP) fund dispersal, comprising the bulk of money to the
sector, was as low as 17% against requested amount.25 Analysis has shown that the poorest
districts don’t benefit most from DADP funds; instead, the economically better off districts with high
staple food production have accessed the bulk of the money. Late dispersals negatively affect
farmers, and government schemes such as input subsidies have neglected vulnerable groups such
as women and young people.26 Poor governance has led to lack of extension services for farmers
to learn skills and affordable inputs. In the districts, one-quarter of extension workers required are
employed with reduced capacity due to limited refresher training and transport. Participation of
citizens in development processes is low; quarterly village general assembly meetings (QVGAMs)
are not convened.27 Exclusion of citizens in planning affects quality of services and accountability,
decreasing chances of achieving MDG1 and MDG3.
Social inequity: Women, who constitute half of the population, contribute 65% of agricultural
labour, and work 9–15 hours per day (paid and unpaid),28 are underrepresented in resource
ownership, in wage employment, and in leadership at the local level. 29 Women lack access to
information and markets due to illiteracy and power divisions. In the target districts, just 2% of
women said they are entitled to own land/other productive resource when married. Only 14% said
they are able to participate in development/income groups such as livestock; a mere 10% said they
knew of people in the LGA to represent their interests.30 Women state that the greatest barriers to
inclusion are their husbands and information/knowledge; 94% said their husbands forbid them to go
to markets. Vulnerability caused by disability, age, and health status creates barriers to inclusion of
either sexes in food/income activities, and limits participation due to stigma.
Service delivery in the districts in the agricultural sector are limited, due to inadequate DADP funds
leading to capacity issues such as extension workers (as stated above), and the ineffective
centralised farmer field schools (FFS). Concern Tanzania aims to complement these activities by
working within the government’s DADPs, land laws, and contributing to targets for development.
4.5
TARGET GROUP (DIRECT AND INDIRECT BENEFICIARIES) Who will be the direct
beneficiaries of your project and how many will be expected to benefit directly from the
project intervention? Please describe the direct beneficiary group(s) – differentiate subgroups where possible - and then provide a total number.
DIRECT a) Description
Poor smallholder farmers who have very few assets and poor
return from assets, suffer from inequality and are vulnerable to
shocks and disasters. Specific groups31 to be targeted:
 Women: Comprise 80% of the labour force, produce 60% of
food crops. They have low asset base, heavy workload,
restricted by cultural norms/institutions/husbands in fully
participating/making decisions in development, economic
activities, household matters. First priority target sub group.
24
All statements above are from community, LGA, and CSO assessment, 2011
LGA assessment 2011
26
Public Interventions in Agriculture – with what implications on gender? Draft report, ANSAF 2011
27
LGA and CSO assessment, 2011
28
Integrated Labor Force Survey 2006
29
For example, only 5% of district councillors across Tanzania are female; World Bank Gender Brief, Tanzania, 2011
30
All figures: Concern Tanzania rapid community assessment of Ngara and Biharamulu District, 2011
25
31
Hereafter described as vulnerable groups
7



b) Number
Chronic sickness e.g. HIV and AIDS: Labour constrained,
poor nutrition and strength, receive stigma, limited
participation in services and decision-making, household
more likely to be poor especially if carer.
Disabled: Less likely to be literate due to lack of schooling,
labour constrained, limited participation in social or family
activities due to stigma, limited income generation, higher
dependency on family members.32
Elderly: Labour constrained, no social security so work
through old age, have dependents: grandchildren/orphans,
vulnerable to poverty, (22.4% higher in households with
elderly), ill health/disability. Excluded from community/
household decision-making.33

Output 1: 18,00034 30 participants x 52 FFS plus families
sequenced throughout the 3 years with group changeovers
 Output 2: 2,000 20 participants in 20 processing groups plus
their families
 Output 3: 210,146 Population of target villages, two districts
Total: 210,146 (Women 110,746)35
Who will be the indirect (wider) beneficiaries of your project intervention and how many will
benefit?Please describe the type(s) of indirect beneficiaries and then provide a total number.
INDIRE
CT
4.6
a) Description
The districts’ population. The reason for this wide scope is the
benefits to the wider community, especially Output 3, which
builds capacity at the district level to be able to serve the entire
district with land tenure and improved DADP implementation.36
b) Number
Approximate total: 560,670 (Total of two districts)
POTENTIAL PROJECT IMPACT Please describe the anticipated real and practical impact
of the project in terms of poverty reduction. How does the proposal demonstrate a clear line
of sight to poverty? What changes are anticipated for the main target groups identified in 4.5
within the lifetime of the project?
This integrated intervention will have significant impact on poverty and hunger in target districts and
will contribute to achieving MDG1 in Tanzania by reducing the percentage of poor people in the
districts and reducing under-nutrition. Improving nutrition using recommended approaches will lead
to better health and productive capacity, resulting in gains in other investments such as livelihoods
and education.37 By integrating with a current WASH programme, we expect significant benefits to
the lives of the poorest farmers and their children, through improved health overall.
Concern Tanzania expects to reduce hunger and poor nutrition through increased crop yields
by up to 600%,38 increased food stocks to reduce hunger periods in between harvests, and
through availability and promotion of a full food group diet of animal protein, vegetables, staple
grains, and fruits. This will also reduce the risk of poor harvests as it reduces dependency on a few
crops, contributing to MDG7. All farmers will benefit from improved nutrition, but especially women
(in particular pregnant/lactating), who are providing food to the family. People living with chronic
illnesses such as HIV and AIDS and elderly will benefit from improved yields and nutrition, important
due to the burden of care of grandchildren and lack of income/food security in old age; and in order
32
Tanzania Disability Survey, National Bureau of Statistics, 2008
Achieving income security in old age for all Tanzanians: a study into the feasibility of a universal social pension, Ministry of Labour,
Employment and Youth Development in collaboration with HelpAge International, 2010
34
Each output will have minimum 50% women and we will ensure that households containing vulnerable groups will be targeted
35
Revised down from PCN to relate to each output
36
Land tenure and improved DADP implementation have been seen to spill over into non-target wards and villages across Concern
Tanzania’s programmes, as have the improved access to agricultural inputs and food.
37
DPG Nutrition 2010; Investing in nutrition for national growth and prosperity in Tanzania. Development Partners Group on Nutrition,
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
38
As seen in Concern Tanzania’s most recent EU-funded Integrated Livelihoods Programme in nine districts in Tanzania
33
8
to improve strength and medication for those on anti-retroviral drugs. Those who are labour
constrained such as elderly, sick, and disabled people will benefit from efficient techniques and
vegetable gardens; those who cannot physically farm will benefit from support to their household
(see section 4.10). Children, especially girls, will benefit most from improved yields and nutrition –
reducing the high levels of under-nutrition found in our nutrition assessment of 2011.
Farmers will get better returns on their crops, increasing their income, especially for the
poorest people and for women. Farmers will diversify their income contributing to achievement of
MDG1 and MDG3. Households will have greater flexibility in household spending – experience
shows that most households make informed decisions to invest in their children’s education, to
upgrade houses, purchase food/domestic items, and invest in businesses. The programme will
benefit all of the community through availability of processed crops, specifically designed to ensure
that women are active in the processing groups and hold leadership positions in for empowerment
and control over productive assets. Repeatedly we have seen women who are generating income
experiencing positive changes in household dynamics and decision-making.
Poor communities will be more aware of entitlements and institutions will be more accountable to
people’s needs. Communities will benefit from increased awareness of the responsibilities of all
stakeholders in the development process. The initiative aims to build strong communities able to
manage their own development priorities through linking all stakeholders for better service
delivery/accountability. All village members will benefit but especially vulnerable groups who will
participate in village planning. This will support the breakdown of traditional norms and the reduction
of stigma in the community against these groups. The poorest people, especially vulnerable groups,
can expect to gain formal access to their land,39 which, from experience of land tenure work for
the past 7 years, improves confidence and the chances of securing small loans to invest in the
land.
4.7
PROJECT APPROACH / METHODOLOGY Please provide details on project approach or
methodology proposed to address the problem(s) you have defined in section 4.4. You
should justify why you consider this approach to be the most effective way in which to
achieve the project purpose. Please justify timeframe and scope of your project and ensure
that the narrative relates to the logframe and budget. Be realistic and not over ambitious.
This integrated approach comprising food, nutrition, income generation, and governance
complements government initiatives (DADP, land laws, health priorities). The three outputs are
mutually beneficial. The programme is designed using this methodology due to needs and feedback
from districts, and experience in implementing similar programmes,40. Using proven approaches41
to address the complex relationship42 between the sectors and recommendations for integration, we
are confident this is the best design for the districts.
The main approach is the successful farmer field school (FFS) for food production under Output
1 – a training farm or an animal husbandry group. This is an area of expertise for Concern
Tanzania; we will start an FFS in each village so multiple farmers can access training and see the
difference in using improved techniques such as weeding, seed spacing, and quality declared
seeds (QDS). Progressive farmers will be trained as paraprofessionals through the FFS, and go
on to support other farmers, with incentives from the LGA. Farmers will also be trained and
supported to produce QDS in order to ensure local access. External evaluators have commended
the alternative decentralised approach as it reaches more farmers than LGA-run FFS at district level
while still aligned with LGA. A major element is nutritional counselling through FFS and existing
structures for extension to caregivers and ‘gate keepers’ (husbands/grandmothers). Kitchen
gardens will be promoted to women, giving them greater control over household nutrition. We will
coordinate with LGA health/agriculture departments for technical support/ joint implementation, for
example, district agriculture and livestock officers and extension workers to conduct training in the
7,904 individual certificates were distributed, with another couple of thousand in the process, in two years of Concern Tanzania’s EUfunded livelihoods programme in nine districts (2009–11)
40
Lesson learning from previous programmes and programmes in other countries in which Concern Worldwide is operational
41
USAID’s Infant and Young Child Nutrition Project, Achieving Nutritional Impact and Food Security through Agriculture – Resources for
linking Agriculture, Food Security, and Nutrition, www.iycn.org
42
This complex relationship has been highlighted by the US Government’s Feed the Future initiative, along with similar initiatives
launched by other nations and multilateral agencies.
39
9
FFS and nutrition officers to coordinate/support crop/nutrition education with CSOs.
In adding value to the crops in Output 2, all crops will be planned so as not to have negative
effects on food security, for instance, crops that are food and cash crops and can be intercropped
such as sunflower. A value chain analysis will be undertaken based on local experience and
expertise. Gender-value chain will get specific attention, based on learning from organisations in
Tanzania concerned with women and marketing. Farmers will be linked with markets through
appropriate means. We will use technologies that are appropriate to the communities. There will
be an emphasis on post-crop storage and preservation in order for farmers to minimise crop losses
and increase value of their crops. Concern Tanzania will support farmers to access credit by helping
to form Savings and Credit Cooperative Societies (SACCOS) and warehouse banking schemes.
For Output 3 we support joint planning through local networks (see section 4.9) at village level
including all citizens, and district level with all stakeholders. By taking part in the process,
stakeholders take responsibility, leading to increased transparency. Citizens are more likely to hold
their LGA to account. This requires capacity support to all citizens, CSOs, and LGAs and significant
community awareness activities. Land tenure is a major component of the integrated approach,
guided by land laws and the previous EU Ambassador, Irish Aid, and President of Tanzania have
commended the approach for being progressive and central for secured assets. Concern supports
the entire process of village/individual ownership, increasing confidence to invest in the land, and
the ability to access credit. We work with LGAs, as they have responsibility for continuation.
Support/resources will be given to LGAs (equipment for land demarcation etc). LGA staff will jointly
implement land work (surveying, development of land use plans, preparation of village certificates
and CCROs etc).
Concern is experienced in each element of this programme; however integrating agriculture,
income generation, and nutrition in villages where we are currently operating a WASH programme
is seen as an innovation. We will make efforts to measure nutrition/food security. Learning is
being applied (see section 4.13). The most recent external evaluation of our livelihoods programme
stated: “The Action has been effective and is already impacting positively on beneficiaries’ general
wellbeing, food stocks, productive capacity, confidence in governance and capacity of LGAs to
provide services. It has reinforced local confidence and strengthened women’s roles in society.”43
In terms of the methodology for integration, clean water, sanitation, and hygiene are three top
recommended services to complement food security/nutrition.44 A WASH programme evaluation
recommended wastewater with vegetable gardening, nutrition education, and crop production
implementation in districts to improve health and reduce hunger, in particular for women/girls.45
Concern’s global programming in livelihoods/WASH has informed the integration, which has proved
effective in Nepal under the name of Domestic Plus. 46 Concern Tanzania intends to mainstream the
approach where appropriate, in particular under Output 1 and 2, capitalising on current
programming in the districts for maximum impact for poor households. Concern Tanzania
acknowledges the importance of gender. See section 4.10. The timeframe is realistic for the
results expected based on experience. However, progress depends on capacity of partners/LGAs,
especially in land and governance.
4.8
SUSTAINABILITY AND SCALING-UP How will you ensure that the benefits of the project
are sustained? Please provide details of any ways in which you see this initiative leading to
other funding or being scaled up through work done by others in the future. Describe how
and when this may occur and the factors that would make this more or less likely.
43
Final Evaluation of EU Food Facility Action, implemented by Concern Worldwide, 2009-11
USAID’s Infant and Young Child Nutrition Project, Achieving Nutritional Impact and Food Security through Agriculture – Resources for
linking Agriculture, Food Security, and Nutrition, www.iycn.org
45
In response to discovering high rates of under-nutrition of children in 2011, especially girls, in the two districts
46
Domestic Plus can be embedded into livelihood and WASH programmes to add value to crops, water, and waste by using resources
available: wastewater utilisation for micro irrigation, solar to dry food for preservation, adding value to crops, creating biogas.
44
10
Concern ensures that the benefits are sustained by working with partners and complementing the
government’s development plans, such as Agricultural Sector Development Plan (ASDP) under
which the DADPs sit, and land laws. Specifically, sustainability is ensured though: FFS
methodology: farmers adopt and practise skills long after programming. In 2009, we visited
programmes implemented 30 years ago, and found improved farming skills, vegetable gardens,
crop diversification, and nutrition skills still being utilised. The promotion of drought-tolerant crops,
embedding QDS producers in the area will reduce vulnerability to weather, and improved extension
services will give greater chance of autonomy and sustainability. We work with appropriate
technologies and suitable crops for the environment and capacity of target group. In forming
processing groups, training in operation and maintenance of technology, linkages with supply
chains/LGAs for parts/support, and training in leadership, finance, bookkeeping etc, will increase
sustainability and scale up of those activities. Good governance helps address root causes of
poverty, often related to power relations, the inability of duty bearers to deliver, and the lack of poor
people’s awareness of rights. Strong local institutions and policies will guarantee sustained positive
change hence changes in the lives of beneficiaries. Land tenure will enable the district councils to
have the resources and capacity to process CCROs and village land certificates, and spread
beyond target villages - eg supported by Concern Iringa District Council has given certificates to all
villages in the district. Functional land tribunals/ councils, committees, and land registries will
support land tenure long term. Learning is emphasised in this integrated approach; having strong
M&E will demonstrate that this is an effective approach to reach MDG1. It can lead to further
funding and scale up, especially as it aligns with recommended approaches to agriculture and
nutrition, and around high-level initiatives such as the Scale Up Nutrition (SUN), Renewed Efforts
Against Child Hunger and Under-nutrition (REACH), and the Tanzanian ASDP. Results will feed
into ANSAF policy debates.
4.9
CAPACITY BUILDING, EMPOWERMENT & ADVOCACY If your proposal includes capacity
building, empowerment and/or advocacy components, please explain how they these
elements contribute to the achievement of the project's outcome and outputs? Please
explain clearly why your project includes these elements, what specific targets you have
identified.
Communities: Target farmers will receive transformative training on improved agriculture skills,
nutrition, crop processing, and governance and targets identified are embedded in logframe
indicators. Through the FFS, farmers also learn record keeping: production data, livestock product
data, disease scoring, and food budgeting. These skills increase efficiency in practices in FFS.
Partners will support processing groups in management, planning, maintenance and operation.
Farmers, especially vulnerable groups who do not easily access information, will be sensitised on
contents of laws/policies such as DADP guidelines/ land legislation so they understand
entitlements. Human rights training will be conducted.
Partners: We work through partnership, therefore we provide support where required to ensure that
LGAs and CSOs can plan and implement high quality programmes. We jointly asses partners’
capacity needs and create a plan with benchmarks for improvement. We will utilise internal skills to
develop partners’ technical/management capacities, and potentially outsource specific skills eg in
human resources, finance, resource mobilisation; M&E and reporting, policy analysis, and crosscutting themes (gender and HIV mainstreaming).
Advocacy: Through supporting QVGAMs and district coordination meetings, we will establish links
from citizen to village to ward and district to enable communities to influence their LGAs. At the
regional and national level, through networks, Agricultural Non-State Actors Forum (ANSAF) and
the Policy Forum,47 we will raise farmers’ issues and public expenditure tracking to influence
policy, expressing farmers’ voice, and engaging in discussion on how to support the poorest people
with services/schemes. Targets identified are informed by Concern Tanzania’s advocacy strategy.
4.10
GENDER AND SOCIAL INCLUSION How was the specific target group selected and how
are you defining social differentiation and addressing any barriers to inclusion which exist in
47
Concern Tanzania is a founding member of both of these NGO networks
11
the location(s) where you are working? Please be specific in relation to gender, age,
disability, HIV/AIDs and other relevant categories depending on the context (e.g. caste,
ethnicity etc.). How does the project take these factors into account?
Concern selects target groups by wealth/vulnerability ranking with communities.
Equality
mainstreaming with a particular focus on gender is part of programme management in all phases
guided by our gender/HIV and AIDS mainstreaming officer. In order to ensure credible and reliable
targeting, we carry out participatory community analysis. We use Causal Responsibility Analysis
(as per RBA) and the Caroline Moser Framework. Poorer women are targeted (widows, elderly,
sick, and large number of dependents). Socio-cultural barriers, largely patriarchal norms embedded
into marriages, households, community and policies, limit women in many areas of their lives. Our
rapid assessment (section 4.3) revealed an acute lack of awareness among women of their rights,
and policies that affect them with only 16% stating they had knowledge of these (see section 4.4).
Women in the districts say their greatest two barriers are husbands, and lack of knowledge.
This requires significant investment such as awareness raising on rights, and working with men to
provide transformative training to change beliefs on gender roles in order to understand negative
costs of unequal power relations. We promote women’s rights to participate in all decision-making
processes, in community (QVGAMs) and household through joint decision-making on
expenditure, cultivation choices, and food budgeting. Women will to take on responsibilities such as
committee treasurer, paraprofessional, QDS producer, and processing member. Diversification of
household food sources and establishment of kitchen gardens are targeted at women to reduce
overreliance on farm produce for household food stocks. Regional statistics suggest the HIV
prevalence in districts is 3.4%, HIV and AIDS poses poverty risks. All partners are actively involved
in incorporating HIV and AIDS into activities and are provided with technical expertise from our
mainstreaming officer. Staff, partners, and communities are provided with information and
resources to mitigate/prevent the spread of HIV, and people living with HIV or AIDS are supported
and considered in all programme activities. Specific farming activities, such as crop diversification,
less labour-intensive crops, kitchen vegetable gardens, and distribution of dairy goats and improved
chicken are appropriate responses to the needs of vulnerable groups and those who care for them.
Communities recognise that helping vulnerable people “to help themselves” reduces dependence
and health risks, and minimises environmental and security risks. We specifically target households
containing elderly and disabled people for all outputs because those households are most likely to
be poor due to burden of care, reduced labour, and stigma.
4.11
VALUE FOR MONEY (VFM) Please demonstrate how you have determined that the
proposed project would offer optimum value for money and that the proposed approach is
the most cost efficient way of addressing the identified problem(s). Please ensure that your
completed proposal and logframe demonstrate the link between activities, outputs and
outcome, and that the budget notes provide clear justifications for the inputs and budget
estimates.
Concern has considered the best and most appropriate combination of costs and quality of goods
and services to meet the needs of target groups and has planned this intervention with careful
consideration of the key aspects of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. These criteria have
been applied to the programme design, budget, and work-plan in terms of determining inputs and
intended outputs in order to achieve the desired outcomes and impact:
Economy: To support the economy of Tanzania, Concern gives preference to goods and services
originating in country, provided they are of acceptable quality and are available at a competitive
price in a timely manner (seeds and tools, processing machines and pumps). Purchasing
committees contain experts in logistics, finance, and technical to ensure all elements are covered.
Efficiency: We will use existing resources in the WASH programme (management and
administration structures and community mobilisation and governance activities to date). As a result
of using Tanzanian seed stock developed for specific climatic zones, we are able to achieve
significant crop increases (up to 600%) at a very reasonable cost. By purchasing local seeds and
appropriate technologies, farmers outside of the programme are more likely to adopt the
intervention, extending its impact. Community-based nutrition promotion is one of the most cost
12
effective ways of increasing welfare in developing countries.48 Poor nutrition in the first 1000 days of
life leads to irreversible losses in human potential, leading to reduced educational outcomes, more
illness and higher mortality, and eventually resulting in reduced work productivity and earning
potential. In addition, poor health loses up to 2.64% of GDP in Tanzania each year, mainly in the
agricultural sector.49 Multiple use of water sources leads to efficient return on this vital resource.50
Effectiveness: Integrated approach can achieve greater impact than projects in isolation; by
integrating, we increase investments in all sectors. Increased governance will improve services,
efficiency/accountability to citizens. Focusing on good governance enables improvements of
government services through planning and coordination with target groups.
4.12
COUNTRY STRATEGIES) AND POLICIES How does this project support the achievement
of DFID’s country or regional strategy objectives and specific DFID sector priorities? How
would this project support specific national government policies and plans related to poverty
reduction?
The initiative supports several of DfID’s strategic priorities in Tanzania: Create wealth by improving
incomes of target farmers (previous and current programming in other districts have shown
excellent results at lifting people out of poorest wealth quintile, and diversifying income streams).
Farmers will be supported to establish SACCOs to access micro loans, and warehouse banking
schemes to store crops and increase value. With an improved diet in the household, the health will
be improved, with a special focus on girl children. This is in line with DfID’s priority on health. As this
initiative will be implemented in villages where our WASH programme is currently operational, this
will also support DfID’s priority in WASH. The initiative supports DfID’s priority on governance and
rights, as there is a strong focus (improving stakeholder engagement in village planning processes,
rights, and information about services). DfID’s priority on social inclusion is addressed through
strong focus on gender and vulnerable groups in the programme. Concern works within the
government’s policies and processes. Tanzania’s National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of
Poverty (MKUKUTA II) aims to meet the MDG1, as well as feeding into the ASDP and DADP. The
government’s Strategic Plan for Implementation of New Land Laws (SPILL), is supported by this
initiative, as we follows the Village Land Act No 5 of 1999 to implement the land component. The
government has multiple policies to increase social inclusion, to which this programme is aligned.
LESSONS LEARNED What lessons have you drawn on (from your own and others’ past
experience) in designing this project? If this project is based on similar project experience,
please describe the outcomes achieved and the specific lessons learned that have informed
this proposal.
4.13
Considerable learning has been taken from implementing programmes in Tanzania (also see 4.7)
and from global interventions. This intervention will take the best elements of previous programmes,
and apply them to current WASH villages, adapting to local context. For example:
Evaluations: Livelihoods external evaluation (Dec 2011) recommended continuation of FFS to
improve production but with more focus on post-harvest storage; furthering investments in value
chain; increasing focus on land tenure; and participatory approaches for the most excluded in
society. M&E should be less vigorous, utilising partners more, and using more friendly tools. 51
External WASH evaluation (2010) recommended WASH with food/nutrition due to high levels of
child nutrition in the districts. RBA: Learning taken from our Rights-Based Livelihood Programme
(RBLP)52 has informed this approach as engagement and joint planning between citizens and LGAs
has proved beneficial to all stakeholders. Continuing service delivery alongside governance work
has increased citizens’ trust and built capacity of LGAs to deliver. However, we have learned to be
patient, as working with formal and informal structures and institutions has challenges such as
Ranking among number eight based on economic cost/benefit analysis according to the 2008 Copenhagen Consensus
Investing in nutrition for national growth and prosperity in Tanzania, Development Partners Group on Nutrition, 2010
50 For further information on Domestic Plus see http://www.concern.net/news-blogs/concern-blog/learning-new-ideas-nepal
48
49
We set up village-based M&E system to encourage farmers to ‘monitor themselves’ in line with increased downward accountability.
However, this failed and unreliable data was collected. We have addressed this failure by putting management of M&E in programme
management rather than programme quality, and instituting a results-based management approach to data collection and analysis.
51
52
http://www.concern.net/sites/concern.net/files/tanzania_lessons_from_rba_programming_2011.pdf
13
presence of deep-rooted cultural practices around participation, gender, and power.
4.14
ENVIRONMENT Please specify what overall impact (positive, neutral or negative) the
project is likely to have on the environment. What steps have you taken to assess any
potential environmental impact? Please note the severity of the impacts and how the project
will mitigate any potentially negative effects.
The project will have a positive impact on the environment. In line with DRR techniques,
different approaches, such as conservation agriculture, will improve soil fertility, texture, and
moisture content, increasing vegetation cover and minimising soil and nutrient erosion.
Domestic Plus will accelerate kitchen gardens to increase food and vegetation in the
villages. Improved practices from FFS such as small-scale terracing and watershed
management will reduce soil degradation and restore foliage in degraded soils. However,
promoting micro-irrigation through river diversions and wells could bring negative impact to
water sources if precautions are not taken. Using national water laws, we will ensure river
diversions maintain sufficient downstream flow, enough for survival of flora and fauna. We
will work closely with natural resources departments at the LGAs/environment CSO
networks at local/country level. The WASH programme has a detailed environmental impact
assessment, it will inform the programme, including water catchment area protection.
SECTION 5: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
5.1
PROJECT MANAGEMENT Please outline the project implementation and management
arrangements for this fund.This should include:
 A clear description of the roles and responsibilities of each of the partners. You must
also provide an organogram of the project staffing and partner management
relationships.
 A clear description of the added value of the each organisation within the project.
 An explanation of the human resources required (number of full-time equivalents, type,
skills, background, and gender).
Two registered local CSO partners will directly implement the project. They have good experience
in rural development programmes in the respective districts (production, land rights, environment,
RBA and advocacy). Both partners will undertake the same activities outlined under the three
outputs in the budget, adapting to their local context. Their role will be community mobilisation,
facilitation, coordination, and direct training and support to communities and LGAs.
 Relief and Development Society (REDESO): will work with Ngara District Council
 Rulenge Development Diocesan Office (RUDDO): will work with Biharamulo District Council.
District management: The programme manager in Ngara will be responsible for implementation
assited by 2 partner support officers (PSOs). The PSOs will be qualified in agronomy/rural
development/nutrition. All staff are trained on gender equality, HIV and AIDS, DRR, RBA, and
accountability and we aim for a gender balance. The PSOs will work with partners on
implementation and monitoring. Country management: The country office will support the
programme manager and the country office will link project, donors and Concern. The gender and
HIV mainstreaming adviser, partner finance support officer, and communications/advocacy officer
will support. Dublin-based equality adviser, agricultural adviser, and nutrition adviser will support.
ANSAF will help form district networks and public expenditure tracking, linking issues from district to
national to influence policy.
5.2
NEW SYSTEMS, STRUCTURES AND/OR STAFFING Please outline any new systems,
structures and/or staffing that would be required to implement this project. Note that these
need to be considered when discussing sustainability and project timeframes.
Concern already has an office in Ngara District. We will require two mid-level programme staff
(PSOs) to support partners to implement technical aspects of the programme and oversee
programme quality. There is the potential for staff to be recruited from similar roles within the
organisation. We will support partners to recruit staff.
14
5.3



5.4
IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS Include a list of all organisations to be involved in project
implementation including offices of the applicant and any partners starting with the main
partner organisation(s). Please only include those partners that will be funded from the
project budget.
Relief and Development Society (REDESO)
Rulenge Development Diocesan Office (RUDDO)
Agricultural Non-State Actor’s Forum (ANSAF)
OTHER ACTORS Include all other key stakeholders who will have a role in the project.
Consider issues of integration with other programmes – especially those of the relevant
government agencies – and how activities will be coordinated with others. How will you
ensure that there will be no duplication of effort?
Key stakeholders are target community members and representatives; ward councillors; LGA
agriculture, land, health, and environment departments; CSOs and sub-contractors; other advocacy
networks such as Policy Forum; zonal agricultural research centres; the EU (WASH programme
donor); regional veterinary and zonal vaccination centres. As per the National Council of NGOs
Code of Conduct (2008), we always coordinate closely with district councils and facilitate joint
planning meetings with LGA departments, CSOs and key stakeholders to avoid duplication.
SECTION 6: MONITORING, EVALUATION, LESSON LEARNING This section should clearly
relate to the project logframe and the relevant sections of the budget. Please note that you will be
required to undertake a project evaluation towards the end of the funding period to assess the
impact of the fund. Please allow sufficient budget for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and note the
requirements for external and independent evaluation.
6.1
How will the performance of the project be monitored? Who will be involved? What tools and
approaches are you intending to use? How will your logframe be used in M&E? What
training is required for M&E?
As part of our PCMS, a comprehensive M&E plan will be developed as part of the start-up process.
This will involve the programme team (Concern, partners and target communities) clarifying all data
collection and how results will be used to feed into management decisions. For each key indicator,
a simple M&E tool will be developed and administered at household (or other appropriate) level.
Two PSOs will provide first-line monitoring. A partner finance officer and systems manager will be
responsible for regular monitoring and reviews of partner finance records and procedures to ensure
they meet standards. There will be regular field monitoring visits conducted by the support staff and
senior management. There will also be specific M&E events as follows: A baseline survey,
conducted soon after agreement. Annual joint programme reviews, informed by data collection to
measure indicators established in the logframe. This will draw all stakeholders (programme team
and target communities) in a single forum to share lessons and experiences of programme. A midterm evaluation will look at existing monitoring data gathered plus gather additional data to assess
progress, adjust, and feed into planning for the second half of the project. Led by an independent
external consultant. A full-term evaluation in the last quarter of the final year of implementation will
look at all data (plus gather additional data) to provide a complete end line to compare with the
baseline to provide as far as possible evidence of outcomes/ impact in people’s lives. Led by an
independent external consultant using Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria.
6.2
Please use this section explain the budget allocated to M&E. Please state clearly in relation
to evaluation costs and confirm your intention to commission an external evaluation.
There is budget provision for the specific M&E events outlined above as well provision for the
allocated cost of specialist support staff and management: Baseline and end line (external) will cost
£6,800 each (£13,600); annual surveys: £6,039 each (£18,118); Annual reviews: £2,657 each
(£7,972); mid-term review (external): £6,800; final evaluation (external) £6,800.
6.3
Please explain how the learning from this fund will be incorporated into your organisation
15
and disseminated, and to whom this information will be targeted (e.g. project stakeholders
and others outside of the project). If you have specific ideas for key learning questions to be
answered through the implementation of this project, please state them here.
Our M&E system, case studies, and joint planning review highlight key lessons drawn from
programme implementation and feed into organisational learning through regional resource sharing
and exchange visits, annual reporting, and reviews. We will establish and implement complaintshandling procedures that are effective, accessible and safe for users. This will contribute to
learning, statistics, and tracking trends. For wider dissemination of learning, we employ a
communications and advocacy officer who is tasked with publication of key lessons for a wider
audience. In Tanzania, these lessons will be shared via the ANSAF and magazine, feeding into
policy debate. Key learning questions will be 1) benefits of integrated approach: how best different
sectors can be integrated, specifically around appropriate technologies. 2) How best to enable
women enter into value chain for empowerment, effect on household dynamics and nutrition.
SECTION 7: PROJECT RISKS AND MITIGATION Please outline the main risks to the success of
the project indicating if the potential impact and probability of the risks are high, medium or low.
How will these risks be monitored and mitigated? If the risks are outside your direct control, is there
anything you can do to manage their effects? If relevant, this may include an assessment of the risk
of engagement to local partners; or risks related to natural or man-made shocks (e.g. drought,
conflict) and longer term stresses (e.g. land degradation). The risk assessment for your programme
needs to clearly differentiate the internal risks and those that are part of the external environment
and over which you may have less (or little) control.
7.1
This is not the full list due to space constraints. We have attached a full risk matrix
Potential
Probability
impact
Explanation of Risk
High/Medium/
Mitigation measures
High/Mediu
Low
m/Low
1. The ability of the
Medium
Medium
Identified private sector to complete
LGAs to undertake
surveys. This reduces likelihood of
village land surveys
LGA extending intervention.
2. Irrigation activities
High
Low
Draw up a full water management plan.
affect downstream
Irrigation measures planned are micro,
water availability
limiting impact downstream
3. Increase of banditry Medium
Medium
Programme suspension as per
in the area
Concern security management plan.
prevents field work
Reassessment of programme area
and/or activity plan
16
SECTION 8: CAPACITY OF LEAD PARTNER ORGANISATION AND ALL PARTNER
ORGANISATIONS AND/OR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS (Max 3 pages each)
Please copy and fill in this section for yourselves and each partner /consortium member
8.1
Name of Organisation
Concern Worldwide Tanzania
8.2
Address
P.O Box 6360 Dar es Salaam
8.3
Web Site
www.concern.net
8.4
Registration or charity number Registration No 1426 NGO Act 2001
(if applicable)
8.5
Annual Income
Income (original currency): € 3,300,430
Income (£ equivalent): £ 2,796,974
Exchange rate: £1 = €1.18
Start/end date of accounts (dd/mm/yyyy)
From: 01/01/2011
To: 31/12/2011
8.6
Number of existing staff
58
8.7
Proposed project staffing staff Existing staff 5 (FTE)
to be employed under this
project (specify the total fullNew staff
2
time equivalents - FTE)
8.8
Organisation category (Select a maximum of two categories)
Non-Government Org. (NGO)
 Local Government
Trade Union
National Government
Faith-based Organisation (FBO)
Ethnic
Minority
Organisation
Disabled Peoples’ Organisation (DPO)
Diaspora Group or Organisation
Orgs. Working with Disabled People
Academic Institution
Group
or
Other... (please specify)
8.9
A) Summary of expected roles and responsibilities, AND
B) Amount (and percentage) of project budget allocated to this partner
A) Concern will have overall responsibility for the programme in terms of implementation and quality.
The country office will be the main link between project, donors and Concern Worldwide. The country
office in Dar es Salaam will support the programme manager in Ngara – who will have responsibility
for the day to day implementation of the programme; ensuring cross-organisational learning, and
disseminating and replicating best practices. Dedicated programme staff will be responsible to liaise
closely with partners and targeted villages on a regular basis to ensure the sequencing and quality of
activities is as per this proposal
B) £ 1,074,322 (38%)
8.10 EXPERIENCE: Please outline this organisation's experience in relation to its roles and
responsibilities on this project (including technical issues and relevant geographical coverage)
Concern Tanzania have been involved in rural development in Tanzania for 33 years. We’re
currently mid-way through a livelihoods programme incorporating the food production, value
chain and good governance elements outlined in this proposal. Independent evaluations of the
17
programme have commended the approach and the results seen to date and we have been
recognised nationally (to the level of the President of the Republic) for our approach and success
in our land tenure element. We have a highly experienced and deeply motivated staff with a track
record of being able to deliver. The team has a high degree of competence in programme and
partner management as well as specific Technical skills in the areas of rights, agricultural
production and value chain development.
Concern Tanzania are well embedded in the west of the country where we have been operating
since the mid 1990’s, initially working with refugees (Burundian, Rwandan and Congolese) in
areas of camp management and WASH and extending to “host communities” in 2003. We made
a strategic choice to remain in the west of Tanzania after the closure of the refugee camps (in
2008) and are currently managing a three year (2010 – 2013) EU funded WASH programme in
these exact districts and villages
8.11 FUND MANAGEMENT: Please provide a brief summary of this organisation's recent fund
management history. Please include source of funds, purpose, amount and time period
covered.
In 2011 our income of £2,796,974 was financed by the Irish Government (£697,950), EU
(£1,349,077), Concern US affiliate (£94,833). GORTA, (Irish NGO) (£43,079), with the balance
(£612,035) sourced from Concern’s own fundraising and marketing efforts in Ireland and UK. The
funds are utilised to fund our livelihood programme to the amount of £1,581,357 and our WASH
programme of £1,214,640. (We also spent £977 on a minor flooding emergency response). Our fund
management has been in compliance with donor agreements and in the case of EU, subject to
rigorous independent audit. In the last five years all donor audits and statutory audits have resulted
in unqualified audit reports (and so far as records exist as far back as 1997, Concern Tanzania has
never received a qualified donor or statutory audit report).
8.12 CHILD PROTECTION (for projects working with children and youth (0-18 years) only)
How does this organisation ensure that children and young people are kept safe? Please
describe any plans to improve the organisation's child protection policies and procedures for
the implementation of this project.
All Concern staff sign up to a code of conduct as part of employment conditions. The code of
conduct was updated in December 2009 to include specific provisions relating to child protection
as follows: “As we work in situations that present serious risks to children, Concern will consider
how it can contribute to their safety and protection in line with our commitment to the protection of
children in our programmes. We will ensure that programmes always take into account the
situation of children, the specific protection risks and issues they face (which may be different for
boys and girls) and address these as far as possible. We will not tolerate anybody employed by
or associated with Concern harming children.”
8.13 FRAUD: Has there been any incidence of any fraudulent activity in this organisation within the
last 5 years? How will you minimise the risk of fraudulent activity occurring?
There has been one incident of fraud in the last five years (in December 2011) resulting in the loss of
$1,790 (£1,158), decisive action has been taken to recover the amount.
Risk management is an integral part of the Concern Tanzania management process. A full time
internal auditor has been employed reporting directly to the Country Director whose primary role
is to identify and classify the organisation’s risks, and assess the appropriateness and
effectiveness of actions taken by management to manage the risks identified. Concern Tanzania
is also subject to regular review (every two to three years) by the HQ based internal auditor,
support from the regional accountant (who is mandated to review risk management on every
mission) as well as regular donor and statutory audits.
18
SECTION 8: CAPACITY OF LEAD PARTNER ORGANISATION AND ALL PARTNER
ORGANISATIONS AND/OR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS (Max 3 pages each)
Please copy and fill in this section for yourselves and each partner /consortium member
8.1
Name of Organisation
Rulenge Ngara
Department)
8.2
Address
Mission Street P.O Box 107, BIHARAMULO
8.3
Web Site
Email: rndjpeace@yahoo.com
8.4
Registration
or
charity THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE ROMAN
number (if applicable)
CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF RULENGE NGARA (The
Trustees Incorporation Act (Cap.318 RE 2002 of 26
Nov.2009
DATED Annual Income
Diocese
(Justice
and
Peace
Income (original currency): $ 189,314
Income (£ equivalent):
£ 160,436
Exchange rate: £1 = $1.546
Start/end date of accounts (dd/mm/yyyy)
From:
01 January, 2011
To:
30 December, 2011
8.6
Number of existing staff
8.7
Proposed project staffing Existing
staff to be employed under staff
this project (specify the total
New staff
full-time equivalents - FTE)
8.8
14
Accountant 15 hours/week
Coordinator 20 hours/week
Project Manager 40 hours/week
Driver 40 hours/week
Cashier 20 hours/week
Field Officer 40hours/week
FTE= 4.375
Organisation category (Select a maximum of two categories)
Non-Government Org. (NGO)
Local Government
Trade Union
National Government
Faith-based Organisation (FBO)
√
Ethnic
Minority
Organisation
Group
Disabled Peoples’ Organisation (DPO)
Diaspora Group or Organisation
Orgs. Working with Disabled People
Academic Institution
or
Other... (please specify)
8.9
A) Summary of expected roles and responsibilities, AND
B) Amount (and percentage) of project budget allocated to this partner
A): RUUD will be responsible for the day to day implementation of the programme in the 27 target
villages in Biharamulo. This will include community mobilisation, targeting, agricultural related
training, development of business groups and selection of the citizens and committees in respect
of the rights related trainings primarily for activities 1.1,1.2,1.3, 2.1,2.2,2.3 and 3.1 with some
aspects of activities 3.2 and 3.3
B): £871,760 (31%)
8.10
EXPERIENCE: Please outline this organisation's experience in relation to its roles and
responsibilities on this project (including technical issues and relevant geographical
19
coverage)
Our organisation is staffed with people of diverse professions and wide range of working
experiences. For more than six years we have been intensively implementing:

Rural Income Improvement Project (RIIP) for supporting rural households to produce
enough food for consumption and excess for sale and thereby improve income and food
security Biharamulo and Chato districts (six villages)

Land and Resource Rights project that helps rural farmers to know their entitled land rights,
to process legal ownership and to facilitate appropriate and productive usage of their lands in
Ngara, Biharamulo and Cahto districts.
o To facilitating acquisition of Certificates of Village Land ( 5 villages)
o Empowerment of villages to offer Customary Rights of Occupancy (Mkungo village)

OVC/MVC project /(Jali Watoto) for caring and support to orphans and most vulnerable
children in Biharamulo and Chato districts ( 8,716 children) in terms of education, health,
accommodation, economic and psycho-social support
.
8.11
FUND MANAGEMENT: Please provide a brief summary of this organisation's recent fund
management history. Please include source of funds, purpose, amount and time period
covered.
Our organisation has for the last 6 years managed various projects worth TZS 1,669,290,350.00
(£667,716) from various funding agencies (Norwegian Peoples Aid-NPA TZS 638,300,000
(£255,320), United States Agency for International Development-USAID TZS. 494,128,553
(£197,651), HORIZONT3000 TZS.536,861,797 (£214,744))
8.12





8.13
CHILD PROTECTION (for projects working with children and youth (0-18 years) only)
How does this organisation ensure that children and young people are kept safe? Please
describe any plans to improve the organisation's child protection policies and procedures
for the implementation of this project.
Families caring children were facilitated to establish Income Generating Activities
Children were supported to acquire Birth Certificates
Village vulnerable Children committees were formed
A network of village volunteers was established for follow ups, reporting and mobilisation of
resources for support
Direct services were provided to children –school fees and Health Insurance
FRAUD: Has there been any incidence of any fraudulent activity in this organisation within
the last 5 years? How will you minimise the risk of fraudulent activity occurring?
No incident of fraud has ever occurred.
20
SECTION 8: CAPACITY OF LEAD PARTNER ORGANISATION AND ALL PARTNER
ORGANISATIONS AND/OR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS (Max 3 pages each)
Please copy and fill in this section for yourselves and each partner /consortium member
8.1
Name of Organisation
REDESO (Relief to Development Society
8.2
Address
P. O. Box 2621 Dar es Salaam
8.3
Web Site
www.redeso.or.tz
8.4
Registration or charity number SO 9459
(if applicable)
8.5
Annual Income
Income (original currency): USD 102,100.00 plus TZS
1651,688,249
Income (£ equivalent):£ 727,993.67
Exchange rate: £1 = TZS 2,493
Start/end date of accounts (dd/mm/yyyy)
From:
1st January 2011
To:
31 December 2011
8.6
Number of existing staff
41
8.7
Proposed project staffing staff Existing staff 6
to be employed under this
project (specify the total fullNew staff
3
time equivalents - FTE)
8.8
Organisation category (Select a maximum of two categories)
Non-Government Org. (NGO)
Local Government
Trade Union
National Government
Faith-based Organisation (FBO)
Ethnic Minority Group or Organisation
Disabled Peoples’ Organisation (DPO)
Diaspora Group or Organisation
Orgs. Working with Disabled People
Academic Institution
Other... (please specify)
8.9
A) Summary of expected roles and responsibilities, AND
B) Amount (and percentage) of project budget allocated to this partner
A): REDESO will be responsible for day to day implementation of the programme in the 25 target
villages in Ngara. REDESO will be responsible for the community mobilisation, targeting,
agricultural related training, development of business groups and selection of the citizens and
committees in respect of the rights related trainings primarily for activities 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1,
2.2,2.3 and 3.1 with some aspects of activities 3.2 and 3.3
B): £823,350 (29%)
8.10 EXPERIENCE: Please outline this organisation's experience in relation to its roles and
responsibilities on this project (including technical issues and relevant geographical coverage)
REDESO has good experience in implementation of livelihood projects,
 2000–03: agriculture/livelihoods project in Ngara funded by the Netherlands Embassy
 2000–07: agriculture/livelihoods project in Ngara funded by Catholic Overseas Development
Agency (CAFOD)
 2004–07: Sustainable agriculture project in Kibondo – Danish International Development Agency
21

(DANIDA)
2007 - 2013 Integrated Livelihoods Programme in Kibondo (Concern Worldwide funded)
8.11 FUND MANAGEMENT: Please provide a brief summary of this organisation's recent fund
management history. Please include source of funds, purpose, amount and time period
covered.
2010
UNHCR
Scholarship for Refugee students in TZ
Higher learning institutions
693,257,000.00
Urban refugee Programme - Refugees and
asylum seekers in in Camps and mixed
solutions
370,000.00
UNHCR
(Local Integration) Burundians and Somali 1,792,799,064.20 TZS
refugees in settlements and newly
naturalised refugees
124,080.00
USD
Concern
Kibondo Sustainable Agriculture Programme
UNHCR
152,020,367.00
Ngara - Grant for Water and Environmental
Concern
Health Programme
116,113,000.00
Total for 2010
received in TZS
2,754,559,431.20
Total for 2010
received
in
USD
124,080.00
2011
Scholarship for Refugee students in
UNHCR
TZ Higher learning institutions
258,176,000.00
Urban
refugee
Programme
Refugees and asylum seekers in in
UNHCR
Camps and mixed solutions
511,691,938.65
UNHCR
Concern
Concern
Total for 2011
received in TZS
Total for 2011
received
in
USD
Local Settlement - Local Integration
of Burundian refugees in Old
Settlements
Kibondo Sustainable Agriculture
Programme
Ngara - Grant for water and
environmental health
TZS
TZS
TZS
TZS
TZS
USD
TZS
TZS
665,639,703.50
TZS
102,100.00
USD
129,279,040.00
TZS
86,901,567.00
TZS
1,651,688,249.15
TZS
102,100.00
USD
8.12 CHILD PROTECTION (for projects working with children and youth (0-18 years) only)
How does this organisation ensure that children and young people are kept safe? Please
describe any plans to improve the organisation's child protection policies and procedures for
the implementation of this project.
REDESO being a humanitarian charitable organisation is against all form of child abuse. REDESO
ensures that children safety is up held in any dealings; for instance there is a clause in all contract
22
we enter with various entities to ensure they do not permit child abuse or child labour.
8.13 FRAUD: Has there been any incidence of any fraudulent activity in this organisation within the
last 5 years? How will you minimise the risk of fraudulent activity occurring?
There was a fraud by the Kibondo branch of REDESO of Concern Tanzania funds in 2011 by one of
the accountants working for REDESO. Once the fraud was uncovered (after a routine risk
assessment by Concern’s internal auditor) senior management of Concern and REDESO took
decisive action resulting in the dismissal of the accountant. The funds were recovered and
returned in full by the accountant in question. REDESO and Concern took a strategic decision to
remain in partnership after both parties agreed to the secondment of an experienced accountant
from Concern to REDESO in order to oversee their financial management systems, which have
been upgraded as a result of recommendations from the fraud investigation.
23
SECTION 8: CAPACITY OF LEAD PARTNER ORGANISATION AND ALL PARTNER
ORGANISATIONS AND/OR CONSORTIUM MEMBERS (Max 3 pages each)
Please copy and fill in this section for yourselves and each partner /consortium member
Name of Organisation
Agricultural Non State Actors Forum - ANSAF
Address
P.O Box 6360 Dar es Salaam
Web Site
www.ansaf.or.tz
Registration or charity number Registered under the Non Governmental Organizations
(if applicable)
Act, 2002.
Registration Number 00003313
Annual Income
Income (original currency): $430,658
Income (£ equivalent): £278,563
Exchange rate: £1 = $1.546
Start/end date of accounts (dd/mm/yyyy)
From: 01/01/2011
To:
31/12/2011
Number of existing staff
Five (5)
Proposed project staffing staff Existing staff 5
to be employed under this
project (specify the total fullNew staff
NIL
time equivalents - FTE)
Organisation category (Select a maximum of two categories)
Non-Government Org. (NGO)
 Local Government
Trade Union
National Government
Faith-based Organisation (FBO)
Ethnic
Minority
Organisation
Disabled Peoples’ Organisation (DPO)
Diaspora Group or Organisation
Orgs. Working with Disabled People
Academic Institution
Group
or
Other... (please specify)
A) Summary of expected roles and responsibilities, AND
B) Amount (and percentage) of project budget allocated to this partner
A): ANSAF is a member-based network focusing mainly on advocacy for better policies and
promoting dialogues and egalitarian discourses related to agricultural sector policy and decision
making processes. In this project, ANSAF is expected to play a pivotal role in knowledge and
information brokering as well as in linking local issues to national level policy platform. This will
involve collecting evidences, research and analysis on policies and practices on specific
commodities and public policies that can expedite the effort in addressing food insecurity and
poverty in rural Tanzania. ANSAF will play a significant role in supporting both RUUDO and
REDESO in developing district level networks, PETs related training as well as inputting into the
monitoring element of the rights trainings.
B): £52,568 (2%)
EXPERIENCE: Please outline this organisation's experience in relation to its roles and
responsibilities on this project (including technical issues and relevant geographical coverage)
24
ANSAF has worked as an advocacy institution in the sector. Due to its uniqueness (having private
sector and civil society organizations working together), ANSAF has been recognised by the
development partners in the sector, the government and donors. It undertakes researches, produces
Ulimwengu wa Mkulima Magazine (Farmer’s World Magazine) which bears technical and relevant
information for smallholder farmers, small and medium enterprises as well as large scale farmers. On
annual basis, ANSAF organizes a Learning and Sharing Event where agricultural practitioners are
invited to share their experiences on the topic. Paper presentations comes from lead research,
members experience and from outside the country.
Over the last six years, ANSAF has been using platforms to influence policies and practices.
FUND MANAGEMENT: Please provide a brief summary of this organisation's recent fund
management history. Please include source of funds, purpose, amount and time period
covered.
Since its inception, 2006 ANSAF was mainly receiving funds from its members as pledges and
annual subscription fees. Development partners such as Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC),
Irish Aid were giving funds based on events – Annual Learning and Sharing Platforms. In 2009,
ANSAF underwent a transformation to respond to increase demand from stakeholder. In the same
year, 2009, ANSAF entered into a three year partnership agreement with Institute for Democracy in
South Africa -IDASA (www.idasa.org). The three year project focused on Smallholder Agriculture and
Public Expenditure Tracking Studies (PETS). Therefore until 2010 ANSAF budget was a little above
Tz 90millions coming from IDASA, Irish Aid, Members, SDC and Gorta. In 2011the organization
increased its focus on policy and enhancement of dialogue between policy/decision makers and
other stakeholders. More partners increased their support and the 2011 annual budget was Tzs
549millions. The ANSAF accounts are audited on annual basis alongside with the Managing Agent
accounts
The main current aim of the major activities (2011-2013) will be Social Accountability Monitoring
(SAM) with the goal of promoting proper sector resource allocations, participation, gender
considerations in order to address rural poverty and food insecurity among Tanzanians.
Our current list of donors include
1. SDC - Tzs 300 millions
2. Irish Aid – Tz 105 millions
3. Kepa – Tz 9.7millions
4. IDASA- Tz 45millions
5. Members’ contribution Tz 90millions
In 2012, we expect to get funding from DfID through its Tanzania Accountability programme
(AcT). The amount has to been confirmed.
All the partners are using a pooled fund approach based on the Strategic Plan – (under review)
which runs between 2012 and December 2016
25
SECTION 9: CHECKLIST OF PROPOSAL DOCUMENTATION
9.1
Please check boxes for each of the documents you are submitting with this form.
All documents must be submitted by e-mail to: gpafimpact@tripleline.com
Mandatory Items
9.2
Check
Y/N
Proposal form (sections 1-7)
Y
Proposal form (section 8 - for applicant organisation and each partner or
consortium member)
Y
Project Logframe
Y
Project Budget (with detailed budget notes)
Y
Most recent set of organisational annual accounts
Y
Project organisational chart / organogram
Y
Project bar or GANTT chart to show scheduling
Y
Please provide comments on the documentation provided (if relevant)
Please also find attached a detailed risk matrix.
26