EC funded

AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF HIGH POTENTIAL IRRIGATION

SCHEMES (ARDOPIS)

IMPLEMENTED BY FAO AND AGROSPHERE

(OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC)

MID TERM EVALUATION REPORT

MAY 2008

Submitted by:
Acacia Consultants Ltd.
P.O. Box 340, Sarit Centre
00606 Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya
Tel/fax: 3742855 Tel: 3746655 / 3747867
Mobile: 0733 780900 / 0722 203 444
Email: admin@acaciaconsultants.org
Website address: www.acaciaconsultants.org
 TABLE OF THE CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ....................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Photos ....................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED................................................................................................................. v

1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 General Information to the Project area.................................................................................... 1
1.2.1 The Shabelle and Juba Rivers ............................................................................................... 1
1.2.2 Climate.................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2.3 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 2
1.2.4 Geology and soils ................................................................................................................. 2
1.2.5 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 2
1.2.6 Flora and fauna .................................................................................................................... 2
1.2.7 Water resources ................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Socioeconomic Environment .................................................................................................... 3
1.3.1 Population of the Lower Shabelle Region ............................................................................ 3
1.3.2 The Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) ............................................................................. 3
1.3.3 Employment .......................................................................................................................... 3
1.3.4 Authorities and Governance ................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Project Design and Formulation ............................................................................................... 4
1.5 Overall Objective and purpose of the project ........................................................................... 5
1.6 Evaluation Methodology .......................................................................................................... 6

2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSIONS ................................................................................................. 7

2.1 General Overview ..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Relevance of the Project and Design ........................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 The Quality of the Project Design: ....................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Quality of Identification of the Target Groups and their needs. ........................................... 8
2.2.3 Relevance at the ARDOPIS’s Strategies, Activities and Approaches levels ....................... 8
2.2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems and Promotion of Crop Production .................... 9
2.2.3.2 Improved Agricultural Production and Diversified Cropping ...................................... 9
2.2.3.3 Capacity Building and Institutionalization .................................................................. 9
2.2.4 Relevance of the Project to Poverty Reduction Policy of EC and TFG ............................. 10
2.3 Efficiency of Project Implementation ..................................................................................... 10
2.3.2 Timeliness ........................................................................................................................... 10
2.3.3 Project management and internal coordination arrangements ............................................ 11
2.2.3.1 Management and Utilization of the Financial Resources ........................................... 11
2.3.4 Reduction of the Project Overheads ................................................................................... 13
2.3.5 Organization and Institutional Coordination ...................................................................... 13
2.3.6 Field Organization .............................................................................................................. 13
2.3.7 Training and Formation of Community Committee groups ............................................... 13
2.3.7 Quality of Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 15
2.4 Effectiveness of the Project .................................................................................................... 17

ii
 2.4.1 Overview: ........................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.2 Effectiveness of the Project Strategies and Activities ....................................................... 19
2.4.2.1 General observation of the Canals that may affect Implementation Efficiency: ........ 19
2.4.2.2 Effectiveness of rehabilitating canals and the related Structures ............................... 19
2.4.2.3 Effectiveness of Community Training....................................................................... 21
2.4.2.4 Effectiveness in Crop Diversification and Marketing ................................................ 22
2.4.4 Gender and Environmental Issues ...................................................................................... 24
2.4.5 Visibility of EC ................................................................................................................... 24
2.5 Impact of the Project ............................................................................................................... 24
2.5.1 Overview............................................................................................................................. 24
2.5.2 Desirable Impacts ............................................................................................................... 25
2.5.2.1 Projected Impacts from Irrigation Infrastructure Rehabilitation ................................ 25
2.5.2.2 Impacts Deriving from Crop Diversification and the Demonstration Plots ............... 26
2.5.2.3 Anticipated Impact from Community Mobilization and Capacity Building .............. 27
2.5.2.4 Impacts of the Water Pans Constructed ...................................................................... 28
2.5.3 Emerging and Potential Negative Impacts ......................................................................... 28
2.6 Replication potential of project .............................................................................................. 29
2.7 Sustainability of the Project .................................................................................................... 29

3.0 KEY LESSONS LEARNT ......................................................................................................... 31

3.1 Relevance of the Project ......................................................................................................... 31
3.2 Efficiency of the Project ......................................................................................................... 31
3.3 Emerging and Potential Effectiveness of the Project ............................................................. 31
3.4 Emerging and Potential Project Impacts................................................................................. 32
3.4.1 Positive Changes Deriving from the Project Interventions ................................................ 32
3.5 Sustainability of the Desired Project Outcomes ..................................................................... 32

4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 33

4.1 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 33
4.2 Recommendations................................................................................................................... 34

ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE .................................................................................................. 36

ANNEX 2: COMPANY AND CONSULTANTS PROFILE ................................................................ 41
ANNEX 3: EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 44
ANNEX 4: ARDOPIS LOGFRAME ..................................................................................................... 47
ANNEX 5: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVENESS ..................... 53
ANNEX 6: MAPS OF THE PROJECT INTERVENTION ................................................................... 57
ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED ............................................................................... 59
ANNEX 8: DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS ........................... 60
ANNEX 9: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED ...................................................................................... 63

iii
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

List of Figures

Figure 1: Intercropping maize,-sesame and maize-cowpea ........................................................... 23

List of Photos
Photo 1: Water being pumped from the river to the irrigation canal. ........................................... 20
Photo 2: A billboard conveying message of the organization behind the project implementation.24
Photo 3: Farmers within Acaaye Canal Command area have started clearing the canal in
anticipation of commencement of Rehabilitation Activities. .......................................................... 25
Photo 4: Farming is currently restricted to the few farmers who are able to rent out pumps ....... 26
Photo 5: Demonstration plot at Johar ............................................................................................ 27
Photo 6: Farmers have erected a fence in the water pan to prevent attack of livestock and human
being by the crocodile that had swam into the Shan Pan From Shabelle River ............................ 29

List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of the Budget and Utilization by Agrosphere and FAO ................................... 12
Table 2: Number of Farmers Trained ............................................................................................ 14
Table 3 Programme for completion of civil works ......................................................................... 15
Table 4: Results Oriented rating of the project .............................................................................. 18
Table 5: Status of Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems Implemented by FAO-Agrosphere .......... 20
Table 6 Planting Materials and Chemicals Supplied ..................................................................... 23
Table 7: Targeted Irrigation rehabilitation and water conveyance system ................................... 26
Table 8: Demonstration plots Established in Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba ............................ 27

iv
 LIST OF ACRONYMS USED

EC European Commission
ARDOPIS Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential Irrigation
Schemes in Southern Somalia
CBO Community Based Organization
CBNRM Community Based Natural Resource Management
CEFA Comitato Europeo La Formazione L’Agricoltura
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FSAU Food Security Analysis Unit (FAO implemented, EC main donor)
IDPS Internally Displaced Persons
IS Institutional Strengthening
KM Kilometers
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
OD Organizational Development
PACSU Project Assistance, Capacity Building and Supervision Unit
PCM Project Cycle Management
PLA Participatory Learning and Action
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
SHARP Shabelle Agricultural Rehabilitation Programme
SISAS European Commission Strategy for the Implementation of Special Aid in
Somalia 2002 – 2007
SWALIM Somalia Water and Land Information Management System (FAO implemented,
EC funded)
TFG Transitional Federal Government
WUA Water Users Association
HA Hectare
BoQs Bill of Quantities

v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

The mid term evaluation was commissioned by FAO and Agrosphere to assess the performance of
Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential Irrigation Schemes in Southern
Somalia (ARDOPIS) Project. FAO commissioned Acacia Consultants Ltd to undertake the mid-term
evaluation of this project.

FAO and Agrosphere are implementing ARDOPIS in the Lower Shabelle Region in Afygoi and
Awdegle districts and in Jamama in the Lower Juba. The project’s operational base is situated in
Afygoe Town. The main target groups of the project are farmers practising irrigated farming, and
traders in fruit, vegetables and other agricultural produce and agriculture input merchants. The report
provides a technical, physical and socio-economic assessment of the intervention as implemented by
FAO and Agrosphere. The project was formulated in accordance with Item 4(a) of the FAO-
Agrosphere Local Agreement (LOA).

Project Design and Formulation

Implementation of ARDOPIS was expected to support rehabilitation of irrigation systems through

strengthening of farmer organizations and development of sustainable market oriented farming.
Through participatory planning, plans for rehabilitation of flood fed irrigation systems; crop production
and marketing were to be developed.

Off-takes, canals (measuring at least 150km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals),
pump sets, pipes and in-field systems were to be rehabilitated to allow water use on approximately
8,0001 hectares of irrigable area that provides livelihood to at least 10,0002 farm families. Other tasks
included topographic and profile surveys. Profile survey was carried out in Lower Shabelle, while
survey for 4 canals and 2 water pans in Awdegle was planned. In Afgoye, survey was to undertaken
for 4 canals and 1 water pan.

The project budget was € 2,162,635.85 of which € 2,000,000, which represents 92.5 percent, is
funded by the EC while the balance would be provided by FAO and Agrosphere. ARDOPIS
implementation was scheduled to take 30 months starting from 11th March 2006.

Overall Objective and purpose of the project

ARDOPIS overall objective was “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved
agricultural production”. The achievement of this overall objective was to be gauged upon realization
of the following objectively verifiable indicators:
(i) Household incomes of rural families increased by at least 15% compared to incomes
before action implementation.
(ii) At least 60% of the target farm families undertake improved agricultural production.

Purpose

1
Which translate to 53.33 ha to be irrigated by a km of rehabilitated canal (150km of primary and 30 km of secondary
canals. Note area to be irrigated by pump is not included in this calculation as it is assumed (observed during the fieldwork)
that pumps are mainly confined within demonstration plots.
2
Meaning that for each ha under irrigation will serve 1.25 farm families

vi
“Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a
productive and appropriate way.”

Evaluation Methodology
According to the TOR, the main issues of the evaluation were to obtain an objective and independent
analysis of the progress of the project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness towards the
expected impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment was to be made on the progress,
achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame as well as
the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluation was also to
identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the project partners and
stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation.

The main methodology applied was the review of the project documents, interviewing key resource
persons in Nairobi and in Somalia and the targeted beneficiaries within the canals command areas.
Field visits and interviews to validate achievement with the Aw-Faqi a local community based
organization (CBO), officials were conducted. After the fieldwork, the evaluation team held a series of
meeting with Agrosphere and FAO for clarification of project issues. Debriefing at Agrosphere office
provided another opportunity for collecting specific information.

Relevance of the Project

Some of the reasons why the project was found to be relevant included the following:
• ARDOPIS project was intended to rehabilitate the irrigation system previously used for banana
production. In other words the project focus was restoration of the irrigation infrastructure and
not constructing new system altogether. This intervention enabled farmers to access water to
irrigate their crops in an otherwise rain deficit area. Since the project was previously working
well supporting the region’s production of crops for subsistence and export markets, ARDOPIS
rehabilitation of 150km of primary and 30 km of secondary canals plus other corresponding
irrigation facilities, was intended to benefit 10,000 farm families who would be able to access
water for irrigation and start crop farming.
• The design and functions of the project also embedded strengthening and creation of networks
between farmers and strategic stakeholders including traders, marketing organizations and
administration among others. This activity strengthened productive capacity of the
beneficiaries thereby enhancing their livelihoods.
• The quality of the project design can be encapsulated as an entire package intervention
sufficiently addressing reintroduction of irrigated agriculture in part of the formerly banana
growing areas and it was appropriate in improving the income of the targeted farm families.
The project activities were realistic and their implementation so far shows that the project was
moving towards realizing the three expected results. The results in turn were logically related
to the project’s purpose and eventually, to the overall goal of the project. This was a clear
indication of the relevance of the project activities and results. The purpose of the project
which is “Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation
infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way” was similarly appropriate in ensuring the
project eventually accomplish its over all objective of “Households incomes of rural families
increased through improved agricultural production”.
• Agrosphere’s Progress Report (May, 2006) showed that among the initial preparatory activities
in the two project areas (Jamama and Shabelle) was to identify the local stakeholders. From
this exercise, the beneficiary community prominently emerged as the key stakeholders.

vii
 • Rehabilitation of the canals and provision of pumps coupled with intervention aimed at
strengthening crop production would ultimately enhance crop production and increased
household income. However, by the time of this review, crop production was yet to start.
• ARDOPIS seeks to contribute to the reduction of poverty among the rural families in the
project areas. This objective is in line with EC Strategy for the implementation of Special Aid in
Somalia (SISAS) of contributing to the alleviation of poverty and peace promotion as its goal.
The accomplishment of the ARDOPIS goal at the project areas contributes to the attainment of
the EC goal for Somalia.

Efficiency of Project Implementation

• According to evaluation team assessment, the project was behind schedule by six months. This
delay was as a result of late signing of the agreement between FAO and Agrosphere which in turn
delayed the release of the fund as provided for in the 1st LOA. Other reasons for the delay include
o Insecurity:-Somalia is a volatile area and insecurity issues are ever recurring,
o Flooding:-the project area was affected by floods in 2006 rendering it inaccessible and
virtually difficult to carry out any meaningful activities until in mid 2006.
o Nonetheless, this review singled out project management as the main cause of the
delay.
• Overall, the project financial resources have been spent well and for the purpose which it was
planned. It is expected that, if the same budget expenditure was maintained, the project would
be within the budgetary requirement of +/-15%.
• Agrosphere had strengthened canal committees and contact farmers in both managerial and
technical aspects- O&M and in crop husbandry. It had also brought on board a local CBO, Aw-
Faqi, to work directly with farmers at USD 2,000 per month which was reasonable. Being local,
Aw-Faqi had fitted well and had a good working relationship had been established.
• For monitoring and evaluation of the project intervention, Agrosphere had baseline data
depicting the status quo of the project area. Quarterly and biannual progress reports and
planning are other monitoring tools adopted. However, it lacked basic data collection tools and
data base for reporting.

Effectiveness of the Project

• While assessing the project activities as contained in the project logframe, the project had
achieved 70.7 percent of the over all activities implementation. However, on its achievement of
the three project expected results, on average, the project had realized 47.8 percent of its
purpose.
• Out of the total 180km of canals (both primary and secondary), 62.4 km had been completed
denoting about 35 percent achievement. This had been achieved within a record time of
roughly one and half months. However, the canals were yet to convey water to the farms. If
the implementation speed demonstrated since February 2008, was maintained, the project
was likely to have rehabilitated all the canals by the end of June 2008, two months before the
planned end of the project in August. The irrigation canals workmanship was within the
specifications and of good quality.
• Since the project aimed at rehabilitating the irrigation canals that existed before they were run
down through disrepair, the flood irrigation technology was not new to the people and as such,
and with a little reorientation in its use and maintenance, farmers should be able to operate the
system as they had done before. Thus, the canal flooding irrigation technology was effective
and is appropriate for area.
• Regarding the demonstration and skills training on selected variety of preferred crops, the
project had impacted knowledge to 2,000 farmers, representing 36 percent of the target group.

viii
 Through demonstration plots, many farmers were expected acquire these skills easily and
effectively.
• The training, whose objectives are to impact knowledge, skills and, attitudinal change and
practices, and establish networks between farmers and other key stakeholders, was
appropriate and effective. So far the training had benefited 75 percent of the 3000 farmers’
committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’
committees) planned.

Impact of the Project

• By the time of this review, no agricultural production attributable to ADORPIS had started as
the canals rehabilitation was ongoing. For the few canals excavated, other related facilities
were not yet in place to allow the release of water into the canals. As such, agricultural related
impacts are basically projected. However, the process had inculcated good will to the
beneficiaries.
• Agrosphere had managed to establish 18 demonstration plots and initiated crop production
primarily for training through contact farmers. It was therefore proper to state that farmers had
and would continue to acquire essential farming skills and knowledge in improved crop
husbandry and diversification.
• Constructions of water pans had brought water closer to people and livestock. Specifically, the
Darasalam water pan had reduced the travel to water point from 8 km to 2.5 km on average. In
addition, it had contained farmers within their villages. Around the same time last year,
villagers reported to had migrated and temporarily settled along the banks of Shabelle River in
search of water.

Sustainability of the Project

• Sustainability concerns are built-in into project conception from the early stages of its
formulation. Attempt towards building of sustainability of the project was noted out of the
formation and / or has strengthening of the community governance structures and technical
training on O&M of the irrigation system. This would enable the community to repair and
maintain the infrastructure internally when the operation starts. Strong management committee
not withstanding, the importance of having effective administration was underlined as one of
the challenges associated with the management of common property resource use.
• Involvement of the beneficiaries which had a strong underlying strength observed in the overall
design and practice of the project would promote commitment and instil the sense of
ownership. Moreover, the flooding irrigation technology was not new as farmers were using
same before the system was run down during the period of social turmoil. The context of the
project being in an arid area fitted well with their needs. This was expected to engender
commitment and instil the motivation to safeguard and sustain the maintenance of the system.
• General security in the area would play a major role in ensuring sustainability of the
developments achieved so far as well as social infrastructure being revamped through training.

Key Lessons Learnt

• Despite the project delay in implementation, farmers’ interest had not waned as the rehabilitation
of the irrigation system meant gaining of livelihood, which they lost as a result of silting of the
canals.
• Where the level of the river had goes down, pumping offers the immediate appropriate option to
irrigated agriculture. The high cost for running the pumps would only be affordable if only farmers
were organized into cohesive groups and encouraged to institute a cost recovery scheme.

ix
• Strengthening of the existing community governing structures, other than creating absolutely new
structures, would pose a lesser challenge of popularising it amongst the community and other
stakeholders, especially the administration. Transaction costs would be low as stakeholders
understand roles and responsibilities of traditional structures upon which project management
should be archored.
• Farmer field schools approaches that use of demonstration plots equip farmers with practical
skills, and more farmers would be reached, and at low cost both in terms of time and finance.
• The community was getting more organized as a result of the training received as well as the
newly found motivation of ensuring proper utilization of the water resources.
• Without intervention in diversification and improvement of crops, access to water alone would not
effectively improve the crop production as farmers will continue planting the traditional maize and
beans seeds.
• Improved farmers’ organization would result into increased social capital building and positively
impact on consolidation of the community.
• Empowerment of the community in O&M was necessary and was a tool intended for enhancing
the capacity of farmers to undertake basic maintenance of the irrigation system. It was intended to
create a sense of ownership that hopefully would sense maintain the irrigation infrastructure after
the completion of the project.

Conclusions

1. While taking the time planned for completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the
Project Report was projected for completion by the 20th month of the implementation period
and while assuming, the remaining rehabilitation activities will only be complete by the 30th
month, which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is behind
schedule by six months.

2. The Agrosphere partnership with AW-Faqi was a well thought out strategy as the latter had
brought on broad local experience in agricultural extension services as a local CBO. However,
this relationship was being used to enhance monitoring of the project activities.

3. The local supervisors (in the project area) technical skills and experience to undertake civil
works was noted to be wanting.

4. Overall, the ARDOPIS PROJECT was on course and performing as per the logframe (Annex
3). However, the consultant noted some items in the logframe such as promotion of regional
and international markets linkages were unlikely to be achieved largely because of time limit
and/or the environment was not conducive to their implementation.

Recommendations

1. Although the project was behind schedule by six months, it was possible to achieve 90% of
activities planned before the completion date. However, it was recommended a-no-cost
extension phase of not less than three months to strengthen the capacity of the farmers to
utilize, manage and maintain the irrigation system. This would also be used supported crop
production activities. Issues to do with regional and international markets should be revised
with a view of abandoning them as there was no time for their implementation and the
environment was no longer conducive to their implementation. The evaluation found the
project on course and implementation was as per logoframe and does not find it necessary to
revise the same, especially as regards marketing as this can scaled down to promotion of
village level marketing opportunities.

x
2. Agrosphere cooperation with Aw-Faqi was a strategic direction of resource management and
attaining value for money. Agrosphere should strengthen this cooperation and at the same
time examine ways to strengthen implementation monitoring and evaluation of the project
using local knowledge and experience of Aw-Faqi. This kind of relationship is encouraged.

3. Because of inadequate capacity to supervise and guide implementation of the civil work on the
ground, it was recommended the Nairobi base engineer makes regular visits to the project
area, and Agrosphere consider establishing a position of resident engineers if security allows.
Frequent supervisory visits would arrest some of the challenges encountered especially during
the time of actual rehabilitation.

4. Overall, the ARDOPIS PROJECT implemented by FAO and AGROSPHERE is on course and
performing as per the logframe (Annex 3). However, the consultant noted certain items in the
logframe could not be implemented such as international markets either because of time limit
or logically the program was not ready for such intervention. It is recommended the
Aerosphere re-evaluate whether these activities are necessary with a view of discarding them
all together. It was the opinion of the evaluation team that the project lacked the capacity and
the environment was not conducive for promotion of markets and market linkages both in the
region and internationally. This does not however, call for change of the project logframe as
farmers are expected be supported to establish local markets (in village) to sell their surplus
crop.

xi
1.0 BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT

1.1 Introduction

This Mid of the Term Evaluation was commissioned by FAO and Agrosphere to assess their
performance in implementing the Agricultural Rehabilitation and Diversification of High Potential
Irrigation Schemes in Southern Somalia (ARDOPIS). The report provides a technical, physical and
socio-economic assessment of the intervention as implemented by FAO and Agrosphere.

FAO and Agrosphere are implementing ARDOPIS in the Lower Shabelle Region in Afygoi and
Awdegle districts and in Jamama in the Lower Juba. The project’s operational base is situated in
Afygoe Town. The main target groups of the project are farmers practising irrigated farming, and
traders in fruit, vegetables and other agricultural produce and agriculture input merchants.

1.2 General Information to the Project area

1.2.1 The Shabelle and Juba Rivers

Lower Shabelle Region is mainly drained by the Shabelle River system which originates from
Ethiopian highlands near the town of Yirgalem, some 250 km south of Addis Ababa. It flows at first in
the direction north east for some 325 km, and then turns south east for about 650 km to the
international boundary with Somalia, 30 km north of Belet Wein. The course of the river then passes
south through Bulo Burti, Mahaddei Uen and Jowhar to Balaad, where it turns south west and runs
roughly parallel to the coast from which it is separated by a range of sand hills about 25 km wide.
After passing through Afgoi, Awdegle and Qoryooley, the River flow into the first of three swamp
basins that extend to Avai. Below Avai the river resumes a defined channel but the flow is much
reduced and it is only in seasons of exceptionally high flows that the water discharges into the Juba
River at the confluence south of Cansuna and from there to the Indian Ocean at Kismayu.

Juba River also originates from the Ethiopian highlands and flows into the Indian Ocean close to
Kismayu City. Of the total 1,200 km long Juba River, 700 km drains to Somalia. Map I (Annex 6, Page
54) depicts the two river basins.

1.2.2 Climate

The climate of the river Shabelle and juba basin areas of South Somalia is tropical air to dry sub-
humid and is influenced by the north-easterly and south-easterly air flows of the inter-tropical
convergence zone (ITCZ). Annual average rainfall is about 500 mm in Jowhar, Balaad, Afgoi and
Janale areas and decreases northwards to about 200 mm at Belet wein. The rain is very variable in
amount from year to year and is distributed in two distinct seasons. Gu is the rainy season starting
from April to June; Xagaa which occurs from July to September, littoral showers but dry and cool in
the hinterland; Deyr is the second rainy season falling between October to December; and Jilaal,
which comes between January to March, is the longest dry season throughout the country.

1
1.2.3 Topography

As has been mentioned earlier the Shabelle River originates from the Harar plateau at an altitude of
2680 m (above sea level) from where it descends to the Audamboi plain in southern Ethiopia and
crosses the international boundary at an altitude of 300 m. At Bulo Burto in Somalia the river flows in
closely confined channel with a narrow flood plain, which broadens, becoming flat and featureless and
is dissected by River channel remnants. The plain is bounded to the south by the coastal range of
sand hills and extends south west to the confluence with River Juba.

1.2.4 Geology and soils

In the area between Jowhar and Balaad, the soils adjacent to the River are grey vertisols with entisols
on the recent river alluvium. They are non-saline and suitable for irrigation although difficult to manage
than the vertisol soils above Jowhar. From Balaad through Afgoi and Janale to Qorioley, the river is
bounded on both banks by a wide expanse of fine textured non-saline brown vertisol soils, which
extend beyond Qorioley, south of the swamp basins. The soils adjacent to the swamp areas
downstream of Qorioley consist of saline grey to brown vertisols.

Some late Tertiary fluvio-lagunal deposits occur on the Lower Juba plain consisting of clay, sandy
clay, sand, silt and gravel.

1.2.5 Hydrology

The Shabelle River flow ranges from 10 cumecs to 380 cumecs at Belet Wein gauging station. In
general the high flows in the “Gu” flood that occur from April-May are of short duration while in the
“Der” flood, during August-December, the high flows are usually sustained. The low flow period with
the flow less than 10 cumecs is usually of about two months but can extend up to five months or in a
good year, may last less than two weeks. The inflow to the river from the catchment in Somalia all
occurs between Belet Wein and Bulo Burto and account for approximately ten percent of the total
annual flow.

The Lower Juba is an area prone to floods mainly due to their geomorphology context. The soils
formed in this region are largely due to the landscape characteristics.

1.2.6 Flora and fauna

The vegetation of the area consists of grass, thicket (Dichrostachy glomerata) and tree species
(Acacia nilotica; A. nubica; A. seyal; Commiphora spp; Cordia gharaf; Dodera glabra; Grewia spp;
Euphobia spp and Salvadoria persica). Prosopis julifrola popularly known as “Mathenge” in Kenya and
in Somalia as “Rambow” is also spreading fast and is covering most of southern Somalia. It is a good
source of firewood and is also used as fuel to make lime chalk. However it has also been blamed for
its poisonous thorns that have been harmful to both people and livestock.

Livestock production is the predominant livelihood in Somalia with an estimated three quarters of the
population obtaining the subsistence needs from camels, cattle, shoats (sheep and goats). The
Shabelle and Juba Rivers provide an important dry season buffer to pastoralist, especially in times of
drought when most sources of ground water are depleted. Wildlife has increasingly been decreasing

2
due to human encroachment hippopotamus, some types of fish mainly the mud fish and crocodiles
are found in River Shabelle.

1.2.7 Water resources

Somalia is largely an arid or semi-arid country with irregular rainfall and water resources vary in
quality and quantity according to location. In southern Somalia water is obtained from Rivers and
shallow wells.

Extensive permanent swamps and floodplains occur on the lower Shabelle River which ends up in a
swamp. The Juba and Shabelle rivers are the only two large perennial rivers that rise from the
Ethiopian highlands and flow across southern Somalia. They are both important sources of water for
domestic consumption, irrigation and livestock. The area between the two Rivers is the country’s main
rain-fed agricultural zone.

1.3 Socioeconomic Environment

1.3.1 Population of the Lower Shabelle Region

The population of the Lower Shebelle region was estimated in 1995 at 616,000 inhabitants, (urban
17%, rural 60%, and nomadic 23%). In 1989, it was reported that the rural population lived in 715
villages and the number of farms was about 70,000 of an average size of 2.7 ha. Out of about
200,000 ha of arable land, 40,000 ha were irrigable while 112,000 ha were under rain fed crops. As
shown (Annex 6, Page 54), the Agrosphere and FAO project are covering Afgoye and Balad districts
in the Lower Shabelle, the population is 264,355 and 118,655 respective while Jamama District in the
Lower Juba region is 100,625 in accordance with FSAU 2005.

1.3.2 The Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)

In spite of the lawlessness that characterizes the country since the collapse of the Somalia
government in 1991, it was reported that the sedentary population in the Shebelle region has largely
remained stable. Due to control by the clans there was no heavy permanent influx of immigrants from
other regions. But many of the workers’ villages that were sited on the commercial farms have been
abandoned, partly because of the lack of work and because of the collapse of the canal system
preventing drinking water reaching them. Most of them moved to small towns like Janaale,
Shelembot, Qoryioley and Golweyn as well as Merka. With rehabilitation of these canals, like the
Bakoro, considerable numbers of households who had left the village are returning to undertake
irrigated fed crop production.

1.3.3 Employment

Changes in land use, cropping pattern and employment are direct consequences of the break-down of
the banana industry, leaving the large banana-work force without employment. The progressing
deterioration of the canal network forced the farmers to reduce their irrigated crops and larger areas
are returned to rain fed cultivation, on small and large holdings alike. The farming community attaches
the highest priority to the improvement of the irrigation system and expresses active cooperation and
commitment.

3
1.3.4 Authorities and Governance

According to the project’s baseline report undertaken early in 2006, there existed two levels of
governance structures in the two project areas of Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba, namely the village
council of elders and the District Council of Elders. The major role of these councils of elders at the
two levels is to solve conflicts and ensure some level of law and order amongst the community. In the
absence of the central government, these structures were essential in maintaining social order.

1.4 Project Design and Formulation

FAO and Agrosphere have individually been collaborating with EC Somalia Unit for more that ten
years in agricultural development of Southern Somalia. A series of actions funded by EC Somalia
have gathered data which is kept under Somalia Water and Land Information Management System
(SWALIM), bulletins and food security situation in Somalia produced by Food Security Analysis Unit
(FSAU), design and of supervision of irrigation canals, water pans, and farmers training in appropriate
crop production, canal management and efficient use of water by Agrosphere. Implementation of
ARDOPIS is expected to support rehabilitation of irrigation systems through farmer organizations and
development of sustainable market oriented farming. Through participatory planning, plans for
rehabilitation of flood fed irrigation systems; crop production and marketing are to be developed.

Off-takes, canals (measuring at least 150km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals),
pump sets, pipes and in-field systems were to be rehabilitated to allow water use on approximately
8,0003 hectares of irrigable area that provides livelihood to at least 10,0004 farm families. Other tasks
included topographic and profile surveys. Profile survey was carried out in Lower Shabelle, while
survey for 4 canals and 2 water pans in Awdegle was planned. In Afgoye, survey was to undertaken
for 4 canals and 1 water pan. The project design technically is feasible and appropriate. However,
there is a likelihood of the system becoming congested as more people may seek farming
opportunities once it is complete and functional. This problem is also likely to grow as the insecurity
continues to escalate- due to the peace prevailing in the project region, people running from the
unsafe areas may seek refuge in the locality.

Market and flood warning information was designed to be shared with farmers to ensure appropriate
actions are being taken. During the fieldwork, information sharing mechanism was yet to be
developed but still in the plan of action.

Due to the topographical nature of the project area, two irrigation methods can be practised; gravity
and pump fed system. Gravity system is only possible when the river level is high. Specifically for the
Lower Shabelle, and only in three villages out of the 13 which are possible to be fed by gravity. From
the operation and maintenance perspective, this has the least cost. However the period when the river
flow is high is quite short. This period is not adequate for a full crop cycle, which might lead to loss of
crop or complete crop failure.

3
Which translate to 53.33 ha to be irrigated by a km of rehabilitated canal (150km of primary and 30 km of secondary
canals. Note area to be irrigated by pump is not included in this calculation as it is assumed (observed during the fieldwork)
that pumps are mainly confined within demonstration plots.
4
Meaning that for each ha under irrigation will serve 1.25 farm families

4
The project budget is € 2,162,635.85 of which € 2,000,000, which represents 92.5 percent, is funded
by the EC. ARDOPIS implementation was scheduled to take 30 months starting from 1st January
2006.

1.5 Overall Objective and purpose of the project

ARDOPIS overall objective is “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved
agricultural production”. The achievement of this overall objective was to be gauged upon realization
of the following objectively verifiable indicators:
(iii) Household incomes of rural families increased by at least 15% compared to incomes
before action implementation.
(iv) At least 60% of the target farm families undertake improved agricultural production.
The above indicators necessitate the undertaking two baseline surveys the 1st prior to the start of
action implementation and the second three months before end of action. The first baseline survey
was undertaken in 2006 and focused on household income levels, sources, their livelihood activities,
and factors influencing these livelihood activities. Importantly, the baseline survey detailed the current
area under partial or full irrigated agricultural production, existing serviceable irrigation canal network,
and water availability in time and quantity at farm level. Livelihoods approach adopted for the survey
emphasizes on livelihood assets (physical, natural, financial, social and human) and livelihood
strategies (strategies of accessing food and income, coping strategies, expenditure patterns and
coping with the dynamic environment). Together with the focus on increasing rural based incomes
through improved agricultural production, the project addresses the pertinent issue of the poverty
reduction as envisaged in the Millennium Development Goal number 1 at the global level. At the
project level, this focus conform to the project overall goal as underlined above.

Purpose:

“Farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a
productive and appropriate way.”
In addressing productive and appropriate ways of use of the irrigation infrastructure this action lays
great emphasis on environmental sustainability and address pertinent issues highlighted in the
Millennium Development Goal number 7. It is noted that the purpose and mainly access and use of
irrigation infrastructure was identified during the agricultural baseline and the PRA conducted by
Agrosphere in 2002 and 2003 respectively in Jamama District. The proposed purpose was also
relevant to the EC Somalia strategy SISAS. FAO and implementing partners ensures that the
following objectively verifiable indicators are realised.
(i) At least 150 km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals are rehabilitated.
(ii) 8,000 ha of flood fed irrigated area developed.
(iii) At least 60% of the farmer population in the target area have access to adequate irrigation
water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns.
(iv) At least 3,000 farmers are trained in improved agricultural practices including adapted
irrigation techniques, through contact with the farmer trainers and relevant farmers’
organization.
(v) At least 5,500 farm families receive services from strengthened relevant organisation and
administration.

5
The implementation objectives are to deliver the above indicators that would be used to gauge the
performance by converting the availed resources to an improved irrigated agricultural economy. This
will in turn be fast tracked through the project’s realization of the expected results and
accomplishment of its purpose.

Expected Results and Indicators:

(i). Selected Irrigation Systems are Rehabilitated and Functional

Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Kilometres of primary canals rehabilitated.

(ii) Kilometres of secondary canals rehabilitated.
(iii) Number of hectares irrigated under rehabilitated irrigation system.
(iv) Real-time spatial data collected by the action and shared with SWALIM on spread, quantity
and/or quality of soil and water resources and the local demands.

(ii). Improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on
traditional farm land

Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Number of trained farmers involved in sustainable crop production

(ii) Number of varieties selected for crop diversification
(iii) Itemised Production (tonnage) available for local and regional

(iii). Relevant organisations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional role

Indicators for this result will include:

(i) Number of organization identified and supported by the project

(ii) Status of rural growth linkages (consumption linkages, backwards production linkages and
forward production linkages)

These results are concisely clear and achievable based on the activities the project planned and
actually is undertaking. Although the project results and indicators are realistic and measurable, the
interventions aiming at promoting markets, especially the international levels (partly under results II and
III) are obviously unattainable owing to the project’s implementation timeframe. Certainly, market issues
are sensitive and sufficient time is required to study, develop and operationalize the linkages.

1.6 Evaluation Methodology

The field work for the evaluation took place between the 21st and 28th April 2008 and was conducted
by Martin Kamau Gitau and Charles Kamau, associate consultants of Acacia Consultants Ltd. The
consultants’ profiles are included as Annex 2 to this report. The methodology, evaluation data tool
applied and limitation to the study is contained in Annex 3, Page 41.

6
2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSIONS

2.1 General Overview

Since the breakdown of the central government in the early 1990s, infightings, mainly clan based
have dominated and pervaded much of Somalia both in the rural and urban areas. Insecurity and the
related resultants have been a major bottleneck to smooth implementation of the ARDOPIS project.
Although risks of renewed large scale conflicts, like the ones that characterized the country in the
1990s is low, increased localized conflict are sporadic and harmful to people’s livelihoods and
endeavours to gain social basics. The instability and insecurity in Mogadishu and the surrounding
areas since early 2007 has by far had had far reaching effects to the progress of the ARDOPIS
progress including difficulties in implementation and follow up of the project activities, uncontrolled
influx of the refugees running away from volatile Mogadishu to the immediate rural areas, especially
Lower Shabelle and subsequent growth of IDPS.

It is under this volatile and dynamic context that the ARDOPIS project is being reviewed.

2.2 Relevance of the Project and Design

2.2.1 The Quality of the Project Design

ARDOPIS project seeks to rehabilitate the irrigation system in the previous banana production area.
In other words the project focus is restoration of the irrigation infrastructure and not constructing new
system altogether. This intervention will enable farmers to access water to irrigate their crops in an
otherwise rain deficit area. Since the project was previously working well supporting the region’s
production of subsistence and export markets, ARDOPIS rehabilitation of 150km of primary and 30
km of secondary canals plus other corresponding irrigation facilities, if successfully implemented, the
intended 10,000 families will be able to access irrigated farming. This action will contribute towards
realization of the first result of the “selected irrigation systems are rehabilitated and functional”. By the
time of this review, 62.4 km of the primary and secondary canals had already been rehabilitated in
accordance with the design survey and prescriptions. .

The quality of the project design was also assessed from its relevance and suitability in ensuring that
“improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional
farm land” which is the other result expected. Through crop diversification cropping pattern, the
economic enhancement of the farmers stands to be realized. The water conveyed through the
rehabilitated canals will make it possible for farmers to resume irrigated cultivation. Interventions in
crop diversification will provide farmers with opportunity to choose the crop mix and enable
intensification of crop production for domestic and market oriented farming. Farmer field schools and
demonstration plots used by the project as strategies to capacity building to farmers will enhance
adoption of improved farming and ensure maximization of food production thus improving food
security while at the same time maximizes on farm returns. Participatory trainings had been identified
as a tool to reach the goal of improved, intensified, and diversified production, involving and supporting
farmers during the assessment. Such training will support the introduction of improved practices and or
new crops and technologies empowering farmers in order to develop, modify and spread appropriate
and sustainable market driven production.

7
The design and functions of the project also embodies strengthening and creation of networks
between farmers and strategic stakeholders including traders, marketing organizations and
administration among others. This is intended to support realization of the other project result which is
expected to ensure that “relevant organisations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their
functional role”. This effort is intended to enable farmers within the intervention area to have regional
and international market niche of the promoted farm produce. As such, the intervention is designed as
a full package; that is from irrigation infrastructure rehabilitation to improvement of farming husbandry,
farm inputs provision, organization development to market institution linkages. However, this review
took note of fragility and complexity of marketing issues, which are further compounded by project
time limitation which is insufficient to enable establishment of sustainable market linkages particularly
oriented to regional and international markets.

Based on the above issues, the quality of the project design can be encapsulated as an entire
package intervention sufficiently addressing reintroduction of irrigated agriculture in part of the
formerly banana growing areas and it is appropriate in improving the income of the targeted farm
families. The project activities are realistic and their implementation so far shows that the project is
moving towards realizing the three expected results. The results in turn are logically related to the
project’s purpose and eventually, to the overall goal of the project. This is a clear indication of the
relevance of the project activities and results. The purpose of the project which is “Farmers in the
former banana growing regions have access to and use irrigation infrastructure in a productive and
appropriate way.” is similarly appropriate in ensuring the project eventually accomplish its over all
objective of “Households incomes of rural families increased through improved agricultural
production”.

2.2.2 Quality of Identification of the Target Groups and their needs

According to the FAO-Agrosphere’s project report, the intervention was determined through and
during PRA/ PLA sessions which were held with the community members from the target areas.
During these participatory sessions, community members were facilitated to identify and set out their
priorities for the project interventions. Similarly, the sessions were crucial in building and determining
the communities’ commitments to the project.

The FAO Progress Report (May, 2006) shows that among the initial preparatory activities in the two
project areas (Jamama and Shabelle) was to identify the local stakeholders. From this exercise, the
beneficiary community prominently emerged as the key stakeholders. Further, the target community
members were facilitated to identify and prioritize their activities. Indeed, the report states that the
interventions will be through groups of farmers that will be formed or strengthened for the
management of water for irrigation and flood control systems and for crop production, processing and
marketing.

2.2.3 Relevance at the ARDOPIS’s Strategies, Activities and Approaches levels

ARDOPIS strategies, activities and approaches are described below with regard to the actual
rehabilitation of the irrigation system as a strategy to revamp agricultural production, crop
diversification as an intervention to enhance crop production performance and finally capacity building
as a long-term approach of ensuring governance, institutionalization and irrigation system
maintenance.

8
2.2.3.1 Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems and Promotion of Crop Production

Irrigation within Agrosphere’s operation area has always been practised. With collapse of the Somalia
Government in 1991, virtually all public infrastructure and facilities were run down. The irrigation
infrastructure in the former banana production area of the Lower Shabelle Region was not spared
either. According to field observations, where canals are not functioning, irrigation is only possible for
the farms lying along the river or by richer farmers who are able to irrigate using pumps in Afgoye and
Awdegle districts. Out of the six natural depressions served by big canals in Jamama District, only
Bode that was operational. Bode had been rehabilitated by Agrosphere under the “Improved Food
Security and Water Resources Management” in 2002. Either way, only a small proportion of the
community members are able to irrigate their lands. For instance, “there are only about 20 farmers
(mainly farmers groups) practising irrigation in the area currently” (Project Report, 2005). Yet, Somalia
is a food deficit country and “improved agricultural production would not only benefit the smallholder
families living in the action target irrigation farming areas, but could provide surpluses to improve food
security in the country as a whole, as well as reducing import requirements”5. ARDOPIS targets to
provide livelihoods to at least 10,000 farm families who will irrigate 8,000 ha.

Rehabilitation of the canals and provision of pumps coupled with intervention aimed at strengthening
crop production will ultimately impact on enhanced crop production and increased household income.
However, by the time of this review, crop production was yet to start.

2.2.3.2 Improved Agricultural Production and Diversified Cropping

Improved practice in agricultural husbandry and intervention in improved seed quality and diverse
crop varieties and types have the potential of improving the overall performance of agricultural
production. The areas targeted are those formerly under banana production before the civil war broke
out. These areas are now requiring a more elaborate intervention aimed at diversification of crop
production for improved livelihoods of the communities. Farm produce market interventions will not
only guarantee a sustained market oriented production but emphasis will also be put towards
production to ensure sustained food security. However, the planned market surveys have not been
undertaken and as such market oriented farming potentials and dimensions remains unknown. Local
markets are however, realistic, particularly now that the country, especially, in Mogadishu, the
violence is prevailing, thus food demand will obviously escalate. Moreover, Somalia is largely a food
insecure country, thus local demand for food will always be felt.

2.2.3.3 Capacity Building and Institutionalization

This activity involves strengthening of local institutions, which includes canal committee, water users
associations, water pan committees, village committees and contact farmers. Capacity building
focuses on organizational, managerial and technical skills. Organizational and managerial skills are to
deal with aspects of discipline, cohesion and conflict resolutions amongst user groups of the canal
command area. Technical skills are to do with empowering community to take more responsibilities
over the canal maintenance and operation. These skills were reported to have contributed towards the
project attaining 62.4 km of canals rehabilitation within a very short time as a result of effectiveness in
committees monitoring the performance of the contractors hired. So far, 66.67 percent of the targeted
3,000 farmers and including committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and
contact farmers’ committees) have been trained.

5
European Community Contribution Agreement with an International Organization, 2004.

9
This training is expected to provide farmers relevant and updated farming practices in terms of skills
and knowledge. Improved farming skills will resort to improved irrigated agricultural production in
lower Shabelle within the former banana production areas, thus achieving improved food security and
household incomes. Apart from forming and strengthening the farmers’ institutions (canal committees,
WUA and contact farmers), no evidence of external institutions strengthening was noted to have been
done neither any effort done in establishing institutional linkages that were aimed at promoting
marketing of farm produce.

2.2.4 Relevance of the Project to Poverty Reduction Policy of EC and TFG

ARDOPIS seeks to contribute to the reduction of poverty among the rural families in the project areas.
This objective is very much in line with EC Strategy for the implementation of Special Aid in Somalia
(SISAS) of contributing to the alleviation of poverty and peace promotion as its goal. The
accomplishment of the ARDOPIS goal at the project areas contributes to the attainment of the EC
goal for Somalia.

In ensuring project sustainability, ARDOPIS has embraced the importance of involving the target
community, organizing, developing the capacity of and building community based institutions to
manage irrigation infrastructure and coordinate marketing of farm produce. This perfectly matches
and contributes to the main objective of EC programme interventions of strengthening livelihoods at
household level and support State and non-State actors through smallholder market oriented
agriculture and livestock development, increase capacity of Somalis for decentralised management
and create an enabling environment for re-integration of ex-combatants, IDPs and returnees as the
new Government becomes functional.

2.3 Efficiency

2.3.2 Timeliness

The FAO-Agrosphere ARDOPIS project report shows that the project was started on the 1st of
January 2006. However, the May, 2006 Project Progress Report indicated the inception activities
were undertaken from 1st March to 31st May 2006, some two months behind the schedule. This delay
was as a result of late signing of the agreement between FAO and Agrosphere which in turn delayed
the release of the fund as provided for in the 1st LOA. While taking into account the time planned for
completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the Project Report was the 20th month of the
implementation period and while assuming that the remaining rehabilitation activities will only be
complete by the 30th month, which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is
behind schedule by 6months. According to this review, this delay is, to a large extent, attributable to
poor project management and administration.

Other factors that were noted to have occasioned delay of the project include:
• Insecurity:-Somalia is a volatile area and insecurity issues are ever recurring.
Specifically, during the inception phase, security in Mogadishu deteriorated in mid
March as a result infighting between militias (sharia courts) and the combatants of the
warlords. The Project Progress Report (September 2007 to February 2008) stated that
“The security situation especially in Lower Shabelle has remained fluid and work is
interrupted intermittently. This fact has lead to delay in completion of works as
targeted. In Jamama in particular lack of any administration has resulted in a situation
where there is little order. Looting of mobile goods particularly water pumps recurs

10
 frequently. The lack of order also delays work progress where armed militia interrupt
works demanding money from the contract”.
• Flooding:-the project area was affected by floods in 2006 rendering it inaccessible and
virtually difficult to carry out any meaningful activities until in mid 2006, although with
poor project management, the take off would still have been shrouded with start off
hitches

In addition, it was reported that in the implementation of the ARDOPIS, funds are released by EC to
FAO and eventually to Agrosphere as in accordance to the signed LOA. According to Agrosphere,
LOAs are quite inconvenient in that they are not flexible and accommodative to the dynamic
environmental within which the project was being implemented. Occasionally, delay in project
implementation was due to the LOA transactions. Nonetheless, this review singled out project
management as the main cause of the delay.

2.3.3 Project management and internal coordination arrangements

2.2.3.1 Management and Utilization of the Financial Resources

This sub section seeks to establish whether or not the project expenditures are in line with the
projected budgets and costing. It is further concerned with assessing whether or not financial
resources have been utilized efficiently to realize the intended outputs as contained under appendix 3.
According to table 1 which present summaries of the total budget and expenditures, the total
expenditure incurred by FAO and Agrosphere as by end of February 2008 amounted to 1,022,235.26
Euros accounting to about 47 percent of the total project funding by the EC of 2,162,636 Euros.
Annex 8 presents the detailed budget expenditure.

The bulk of the project budget is devoted under item 6 referred to as “others-Works”, which is directed
towards realization of the project’s results. This item of the budget accounts for 44.8 percent of the
entire project budget. By the time of this review only 27 percent of this budget had been utilized
mainly on the capacity building. Cost on human resource is the second most expensive item of the
project representing 31.1 percent of the total project cost. By the time of this review, 75 percent of the
budget had been consumed in the payment of the staff, mainly by FAO which had already exhausted
93 percent of its human resource budget. Agrosphere, on its part had spent only 46 percent of its
budget. The reason for underutilization is mainly attributed to the times when the project activities
could not be implemented mainly as a result of insecurity prevailing in the area and partly as a result
of management challenges. Travel budget item is another area where utilization has been high as 78
percent of the budget had been spent by the time of the review.

While considering the general implementation performance which has been rated at 70.7 percent, the
balance of the budget is sufficient to carter for financial requirement for the implementation period
including the three months no cost extension phase proposed. The bulk of the budget should be
focused towards the completion of the rehabilitation works, which only 34.7 percent of the primary and
secondary canals has been complete by the time of this review and in the diversification of the crop
production as well as in capacity building.

The main challenges will be on ensuring essential travels whose budgets will, most likely, not be
sufficient to carter for the costs for the remain implementation phase. It is advisable that FAO try as
much as possible to internally handle most of the short term consultancies whose expertise is
available either with FAO itself or from Agrosphere. Some of the tasks that can be executed with
internal expertise are under budget item 5 know as “Other costs, Services” including:

11
 • Short term consultant- Crop Diversification
• Short term consultant- Crop Post Harvest
• Short term consultant- Irrigation/ Civil Structure
• Short term consultant- Soil Science.

Overall, the project financial resources have been spent well and for the purpose which it was
planned. It was expected that, if the same budget expenditure was maintained, it was likely to be
within requirement of +/-15% of budget.

Table 1: Summary of the Budget and Utilization by Agrosphere and FAO

6
Description of the Budget Item Budget Expenditure Balance Percent
1. Human Resources
AGROSPHERE 257,025 119,396 137,628.69 54
FAO 416,010 386,691 29,318.91 7
Sub Total 673,035 506,087 166,947.60 25
2. Travel
Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22
Sub Total 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22
3. Equipment and Supplies
FAO 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45
Sub Total 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45
4. Local Office-Action Cost
FAO 27,650 5,206 22,443.91 81
Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 34,800 25,884 8,916.16 26
Sub Total 62,450 31,090 31,360.07 50
5. Other Costs, Services
FAO 83,500 21,254 62,245.73 75
Shared by FAO and AGROSPHERE 34,000 14,637 19,363.45 57
Sub Total 117,500.00 35,890.82 81,609.18 69
6. Others-Works
FAO 753,000 114,852 638,148.38 85
AGROSPHERE 215,000 148,631 66,368.94 31
Sub Total 968,000 263,483 704,517.32 73
8. Administrative
FAO 141,481 71,995.30 69,485.70 49
Sub Total 141,481 71,995 69,485.70 49
Summaries
AGROSPHERE 472,025 268,027 203,997.63 43
FAO 1,607,811 702,714 905,097.43 56
Shared Between FAO and AGROSPHERE 82,800 51,494 31,305.68 38

Total 2,162,636.00 1,022,235.26 1,140,400.74 53

6
This is calculated as the percent of the item expenses deducted from the budget (see also Annex 8).

12
2.3.4 Reduction of the Project Overheads

Attempts to reduce project operational costs were noted in transport. Investing in purchasing of
project’s vehicle(s), maintenance and other related costs, mainly fuel and the driver, usually takes up
a major share of the budget that would otherwise be used for development activities. To minimize on
this transportation cost, Agrosphere had resorted to hiring transport. Motorbikes were used for
extension service and were brought and distributed in Afgoye, Awdegle and in Jamama. Also it was
noted motor bikes are more efficient and appropriate means of transport because of project area
terrain and road network.

2.3.5 Organization and Institutional Coordination

Agrosphere had strengthened canal committees and contact farmers in both managerial and technical
aspects- O&M and in crop husbandry. It had also brought on board a local NGO, Aw-Faqi, to work
directly with farmers. Being local CBO, Aw-Faqi, had fitted well and a good working relationship
appeared to had been established. But it was apparent that no other institutional linkages that
Agrosphere had established, especially those were expected to enhance crop production, like
creating linkage with the local traders and marketing as indicated in the logframe.

In addition, this evaluation established that support and good working relationship with the local
administration (districts and regional authorities) was significantly important in resolving and managing
small differences. In this regards, it was noted the relationship between Agrosphere with local
administration had not been healthy. Agrosphere had been trying to amend this relationship and had
improved with the opening of Afgoye office and this may help in enhancing local partnerships and
relationships.

2.3.6 Field Organization

In Jamama and Afgoye, Agrosphere had employed professionals who had been trained in-house in
order to execute the organization’s work more effectively. Although this strategy was rather
expensive, it had proved more appropriate, particularly for Jamama which is a remote district as
compared with others and had no qualified manpower and equipments. In Awdegle District,
Agrosphere opted for partnership with a local CBO - Aw-Faqi for rehabilitation and development
activities. Aw-Faqi has experience in the capacity building and in agricultural production extension
services. Other than Agrosphere establishing a field office and hire personnel, it entered into
partnership with AW-Faqi to use their vast experience and knowledge of the area to undertake
implementation of the ARDOPIS activities. The contract amount for services provided by AW-Faqi
was 2,000 USD payable upon production of a monthly progress report. Under this arrangement, the
evaluation team found it to be efficient in that Aw-Faqi had elaborate network of extension staff who
known by local farmers. As such, transaction cost had been low and also cost related to staff
employment and maintenance was avoided. However, supervision of the NGO’s activities, beyond
use of the monthly reports, was found to be lacking and wanting.

2.3.7 Training and Formation of Community Committee groups

Community training was based on a tailor made-training module conducted by the project staff. The
staff had undertaken a Training of Trainers (TOT) course on the same. The modules for training
included:

13
 • Improved crop production
• Operation and maintenance of irrigation system and pumps
• Organization for community participation including WUAs, and
• Group dynamics

Training of the committees (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’ committees), were
organized in situ within a central location. The trainings were designed to take two to three days
starting from the morning and ending before 1.00 o’clock daily. This arrangement allowed committee
members to attend the training sessions without many difficulties such as travel distance, and also
gave farmers ample time to attend to their routine chores. So far, 83 contact farmers from various
villages had been trained since 2006 in Awdegle by Aw-Faqi. The trained contact farmers, used
demonstration plots to reach out to other farmers. The use of demonstration plots was noted to reach
many more farmers, even outside the targeted villages. Moreover, owing to the illiteracy level of the
community members, demonstrations were more appropriate for community that “learn by seeing and
by doing “. It had proved to be an efficient way of imparting skills as opposed to class training. Table 2
presents the number of farmers trained.

Table 2: Number of Farmers Trained

Type of Training Number Trained Total Planned Percent

O&M and ODIS (Water 2250 3000 75
Committee
Improved Farming Practices 837 200 42
(Contact Farmers)

From contextual point of view of the training modules, in the long run, the performance efficiency will
be enhanced and sustained internally (note the production is yet to start). For instance, the community
was expected to use the acquired technical skills to ensure that the canals were always well
maintained. This intervention would ensure an extended life span thus cutting cost that would have
otherwise been incurred from rehabilitation occasioned by poor maintenance of the infrastructure.
Also both, soft ware (conflict management, resource mobilization etc.) and hardware (canal and
equipment maintenance; and spare parts) aspects would be addressed timely as the skills and
knowledge had been impacted on the beneficiaries.

The evaluation took the cognizance of the fact the project was forming and strengthening farmers’
management institutions around the traditional institutions. By so doing, the rigours of forming a new
outfit was altogether avoided including the time taken to popularize the technologies amongst the
farming community.

While the training appeared relevant and appropriate in the realization of skills and knowledge
delivery in farming, group leadership and in governing management of irrigation systems, the capacity
to delivery and transfer the technologies and learning was insufficient. This view was formed out of
the interview conducted to key informants by the review team, especially the local training
coordinators. The interview revealed that the coordinators were not quite coherent in articulating the
issues contained in the training manual. In addition, the contents of the training workshops were
poorly reported, which was a manifestation of poor facilitation of the same.

7
The trained contacts farmers have in turn reached out to about 2,000 farmers through farmer field school approach based
training.

14
2.3.7 Quality of Monitoring

In order to establish the status quo condition of the project area, Agrosphere Project report had a
provision for undertaking a target area community baseline survey. This appears to have been done
according to one of the project quarterly report. Besides the quarterly reports, the project also has a
six months progress and planning reports. Further, this review noted that Agrosphere always
developed a workplan drawn from the project original logframe that guided them in the implementation
of activities in the quarter and or in the six months planning period. At the time of this review, a well
documented workplan report for September 2007 to February 2008 was presented to the team. This
report also contained a measurable workplan/monitoring plan of the civil works expected to be
completed by the end of the project period as depicted in the Table 3, below.

In addition, the reports included the challenges/problems encountered in the implementation of

activities and provide recommendations to overcome them as they prepare to implement the next
quarter of the project. This is important as the pitfalls noticed will be avoided in the future. However,
no tools for recording monitoring activities in the field were found.

Table 3: Programme for completion of civil works

No Status Status Activity March- June – Remarks

of of May Aug
survey design 2008 2008
4 Done Done Rehabilitation/Construction of Bode Contracting in
secondary canal 1 (construction of progress
culvert crossing)
5 Done Done Rehabilitation/Construction of Bode Contracting in
secondary canal 2 (construction of progress
culvert crossing)
6 Done Done Rehabilitation/Construction of Bode Contracting in
secondary canal 3 (construction of progress
culvert crossing)
7 Done Done Rehabilitation construction of Construction in
Gobanimo – Isomery canal system progress
including excavations and
construction of culvert crossings
8 Done Done Survey and design of desheks Contracting in
supply canals (Yaqjif, Naftur Qur, progress
Rahole canals)
9 Done Construction of the desheks supply Implementation
canals (Naftur Qur, Rahole and planned for Mar/May
Yaqjif) including excavations and 2008
construction of 3 culvert crossings
10 In In Survey and design of Malashoy Survey completed for
progress progress canal system secondary canals
11 In In Rehabilitation construction of Implementation
progress progress Malashoy canal system including planned for
excavations of main and secondary March/April/May
canals 2008 for secondary
canals and
July/August 2008 for
the main canal
12 Done Done Development of Bode Bode / Far Contracting in
Murgid canal culvert crossings progress –
Construction

15
 expected in Jan/Mar
2008
14 Not done Not Development of Bangeni/Geldille Not a priority –
done pump fed system including farmers prefer
excavations and supply of pump gravity system
sets
15 Not done Not Survey and design of Gobanimo – Not a priority due to
done Isomery pump fed system security issues
16 Not done Not Development of Gobanimo – Not a priority due to
done Isomery pump fed system including security issues
excavations and supply of pump
sets
17 Done Done Rehabilitation of Hanole canal Contracting process
(Darasalam village) including completed.
excavation and construction of water Implementation
control structures works starting in
March 2008
18 Done Done Rehabilitation of Yaqle canal (Shaan Contracting process
village) including excavation and completed.
construction of water control Implementation
structures works starting in
March 2008
19 Done Done Rehabilitation of Principal canal Contracting process
(Bulo Barow village) including completed.
excavation and construction of water Implementation
control structures works
20 Done Done Survey and design of Malable canal Survey done.
(Tawakal village), Boley canal Design in progress.
(Jowhar village) and Herey
canal(Barire village)
21 Done Done Rehabilitation of Boley canal Survey done.
(Jowhar village) including excavation Design in progress.
and construction of water control
structures
22 Done Done Rehabilitation of Sheikh Mohamed Contracting process
canal (Nuun village) including completed.
excavation and construction of water Implementation
control structures and supply of works starting in
pump set March 2008
23 Done Done Rehabilitation of Malable canal Survey done.
(Tawakal village) including Design and
excavation and construction of water preparation of Boss
control structures and supply of in progress.
pump set
24 Done Done Rehabilitation of Herey canal (Barire Survey done.
village) including excavation and Design and
construction of water control preparation of BoQs
structures and supply of pump set in progress.
25 Done Done Rehabilitation of Governo canal Contracting process
(Sabiid village) including excavation completed.
and construction of water control Implementation
structures and supply of pump set works starting in
March 2008
26 Done Done Rehabilitation of Ashir canal Contracting of
(Mareerey village) including construction in
excavation and construction of water progress
control structures and supply of
pump set

16
 27 Done Done Rehabilitation of Agley canal Contracting process
(Galware village) including completed.
excavation and construction of water Implementation
control structures and supply of works starting in
pump set March 2008
28 Done Done Rehabilitation of Wadhere canal Contracting process
(Galgube village) including completed.
excavation and construction of water Implementation
control structures and supply of works starting in
pump set March 2008
29 In Survey and design of Huurlaawe Survey in progress.
progress canal (Anole village), and Design and BoQs to
Coley/Kalafow canal (Baqdad be ready by April
village) 2008
30 In Rehabilitation of Huurlaawe canal Implementation
progress (Anole village) including excavation planned for May/July
and construction of water control 2008
structures and supply of pump set
31 Done Rehabilitation of Coley/Kalafow Survey done.
canal (Baqdad village) including Design and
excavation and construction of water preparation of BoQs
control structures and supply of in progress.
pump set

N.B. For Balow, Nuun, Barire, Tawakal, Sabiid, Mareerey, Galware, Anole, Galgube, Baqdad, Bangeni and Gobanimo pump fed
implementation will include rehabilitation of the canals and supply of irrigation pump sets.

2.4 Effectiveness of the Project

2.4.1 Overview

Being a mid term project evaluation, in terms of the project effectiveness, the extent at which the
proposed milestones have been achieved and the implementation process were considered. The
evaluation examined the associated benefits deriving from the project, the effectiveness and
modalities of converting inputs into outputs, both planned and unforeseen.

The two and half years ARDOPIS project that commenced in March 2006 has “household income of
rural families increased through improved agricultural production” as its overall objective. The
intervention was designed to produce three main results, namely:

1. Selected irrigation systems are rehabilitated and functional,

2. improved agricultural production using irrigation and diversified cropping is practised on traditional
farm land, and
3. Relevant organizations and administrations strengthened to fulfil their functional roles.

Realization of the above results are major measuring elements in tracking the project performance
towards realization of the purpose which is “farmers in the former banana growing regions have
access to and use irrigation infrastructure in productive and appropriate way”. Table 4, below, depicts
a summary of the projects performance measured against the indicators provided for measuring
realization of the project purpose.

While considering the stage of the project (which is about seven months from its official closure) and
on average had achieved 47.8 percent implementation, it was unlikely to achieve the project targets,

17
especially the results II and III. Result I that was mainly civil works for canals would be achieved.
Although the rehabilitation work had started late (in February for the Gobanimo system and towards
the end of March, 2008 for the Hanole canal), considerable groundwork, rated at 70.7% (see Annex 4
(b), Page 47), in preparation for actual rehabilitation activities has been achieved. This could provide
the explanation as to why within a very short time spent in the actual rehabilitation of the canals, a
total of 62.4 km (of both primary and secondary canals as presented in table 3), had been done within
a record time of roughly one and half months. This work represented about 35 percent of the total
180km of the canal that was planned. If the implementation speed demonstrated since February
2008, was maintained, the project was likely to rehabilitate all the canals by the end of June 2008, two
months before the planned end of the project in August. More than 90 percent of the results II and III
were projected to be accomplished by the end of the project. The results two and three activities were
unlikely to be achieved, because of lack of time to organize for regional and international markets, and
further institutionalization linkages as targeted in the two results.

The overall project performance (overall objective and the hitherto activities and the resultant outputs
of the project under review have been assessed and rated at 70.7 percent as presented in Annex 4
(b).

Table 4: Results Oriented rating of the project

Activity Indicators Planned Actual % Remarks/Comments

Rehabilitation of small primary 150
canals (in km)
Rehabilitation of secondary 30
canals (in km)
Area under flood irrigation (in ha) 8,000
% of the farmer population in the 60
target area having access to
adequate irrigation water and
utilize this water appropriately,
cropping plans and patterns
Number of farmers trained in 3,000
improved agricultural practices
including adapted irrigation
techniques, through contact with
the farmer trainers and relevant
farmers’ organization
Number of farm families receive 5,500
services from strengthened water
users association and village
development organization
% of target farm families 60
undertaking improved agricultural
production
Total
52.24 34.83 Villages targeted reached by canals
developed and works continuing
10 25.00 Development work is going on
3,319 41.49 Irrigation had not started, hence this present
potential of the target area which will be
reached once the water is released
25.93 43.22 This present the potential of farm families to
be served out of the targeted 10,000
2,000 66.67 Training is going on
4970 90.36 Committees have been formed where
irrigation development is taking place, have
been trained and are having constant
contacts with the farmers
1,800 33 About 1000 farmers have been trained.
(Farmers in demo plots/target no of 3000).
So far only 20% of the 3000 have been
trained; hence more time is required in order
to train the targeted number of farmers.
47.8 As can be observed much of preparatory
activities have been done, hence
rehabilitation of the remain parts can be
completed pretty fast if the rehabilitation
pace is maintained

18
2.4.2 Effectiveness of the Project Strategies and Activities

This sub section focuses on the effectiveness and the results deriving from the projects strategies and
activities implemented over the period under review.

2.4.2.1 General observation of the Canals that may affect Implementation Efficiency

Due to many years of neglect and increased level of siltation, the canals have no uniform bed slope.
The quality of the workmanship was poor. The quality of workmanship was inferior and this resulted in
canals bank collapsing and canals were noted not to be straight. At the time of the visit, heavy siltation
was evident. The major maintenance activity of the canal would be de-silting. This was likely to
continue to be the main challenge to the operation and maintenance activity of the project after
completion date.

Another concern noted during the field visit, was the invert levels. The canal depth has continued to
increase, resulting in many farmers not getting enough water.

2.4.2.2 Effectiveness of rehabilitating canals and the related Structures

Technical appraisal of hydraulic structures, assessment of pumping sets, profile survey, designs,
preparation of bill of quantities (BoQs) and contracting of canals civil works and the water pans had
been completed. The actual rehabilitation of the irrigation infrastructure works was underway apart
from Malashoy secondary canal 1, Jamada Malashoy secondary canal 2, Jamama, Malashoy main
canal and Far Mugid depression also in Jamama. In the Lower Shabelle, all the contracts had been
issued for construction of the twelve canals to be rehabilitated and the four water pans. The
construction had also started apart for four canals, namely Boley canal, Johwar village, Awdegle;
Malable canal, Tawakal village, Awdegle; Herey canal, Barire village, Awdegle; Coley/Alifow canal,
Baqdad village, Afgoye; Huurlawe canal, Anole village, Afgoye and for Galgube water pan, Galgube
village, Afgoye. Indeed, seven canals and four water pans were complete. The status of rehabilitation
activities is presented in table 5, below. However, no crop production has started as within the
irrigation command areas of the completed canals. Therefore outputs related to crop production and
household incomes were yet to be realized by the beneficiaries. However, the farmers were irrigating
using by pumping technology, a technology which was restrictive due to high cost. It was therefore
restricted to large scale producers or few farmers who could afford the cost of hiring pumps.

19
Photo 1: Water being pumped from the river to the irrigation canal.

Through EU-Sida funded water pan development, Agrosphere, FAO and AW-Faqi had constructed
Darasalam and Shaan water pans. Mubarak water pan was under construction. These structures
were useful in that they will discourage livestock from taking water straight from the canal once
rehabilitated, which would otherwise result to its destruction. The pans had become a major source of
domestic water.

However, these pans will be dependant on the level of the river water. This also means that without
pumps to feed into the pans, they will remain dry during the dry spell as it was the case with
Darasalam Pan during the time of this review.

Table 5: Status of Rehabilitation of Irrigation Systems Implemented by FAO-Agrosphere

No Canal Km Km Km Contracted or Km
planned surveyed designed contracting implemented
process
1 Hanole canal, Darasalam village, 8 8 8 8 8
Awdegle
2 Yaqle canal, Shaan village, 5 5 5 5 5
Awdegle
3 Principle canal, Barow village, 5 5 5 5 4
Awdegle
4 Sheikh Mohamed canal, Nuun 8 8 8 8 4
village, Awdegle
5 Agley canal, Galware village, 12 12 12 12 2.3
Afgoye
6 Ashir/Agley canal, Marereey 13 13 13 13 7.3
village, Afgoye
7 Governo canal, Sabiid village, 12 12 12 12 6.2
Afgoye
8 Wadhere canal, Galgube village, 15 15 15 15 5.0
Afgoye
9 Darasalam water pan, Darasalam 2 2 2 2 2
village, Awdegle
10 Shaan water pan, Shaan village, 2 2 2 2 2

20
 Awdegle
11 Galgube water pan, Galgube 2 2 2 2 0
village, Afgoye
12 Mubarak water pan, Mubarak 3 3 3 3 3
village, Awdegle
13 Boley canal, Johwar village, 6 6 6 6 0
Awdegle
14 Malable canal, Tawakal village, 6 6 6 6 0
Awdegle
15 Herey canal, Barire village, 15 15 15 15 0
Awdegle
16 Coley/Alifow canal, Baqdad 15 15 15 15 0
village, Afgoye
17 Huurlawe canal, Anole village, 12 12 12 12 0
Afgoye
18 Bode Bode secondary canal 1, 2 2 2 2
Jamama 2
19 Bode Bode secondary canal 2, 2 2 2 2
Jamama 2
20 Bode Bode secondary canal 3, 2 2 2 2
Jamama 2
21 Gobanimo main canal, Jamama 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6
22 Gobanimo secondary canal 1, 1
Jamama 2 2 2 2
23 Gobanimo secondary canal 2, 2
Jamama 2 2 2 2
24 Gobanimo secondary canal 3, 1
Jamama 2 2 2 2
25 Malashoy secondary canal 1, 0
Jamama 2 2 2 0
26 Malashoy secondary canal 2, 0
Jamama 2 2 2 0
27 Malashoy main canal, Jamama 1.2 1.2 1.2 0 0
28 Desheks - Abubakar/Naftur Qur 0
canal, Jamama 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
29 Desheks, Rahoe/Adede Geri 0
Canal, Jamama 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2
39 Desheks, Gadudey Yaqjif canal, 0
Jamama 1 1 1 1
40 Far Mugid depression, Jamama 8 8 8 0 0
Total 175.3 175.3 175.3 162.1 62.4

2.4.2.3 Effectiveness of Community Training

The farmers training module is broad and comprehensive touching on both the organizational
development aspects (OD) and institutional strengthening (IS) aimed at strengthening the managerial
aspects of farmers’ groups. Further, the training module is detailed on the agronomic aspects, O&M of
the irrigation systems and marketing component.

From the contextual perspective of the module, the training whose objectives are to impart
knowledge, skills and, attitudinal change and practices, and establish networks between farmers and
other key stakeholders, is appropriate and effective. So far the training has benefited 75 percent of the
3000 farmers’ committee group members (canal, WUA, village development and contact farmers’
committees) planned. Regarding the demonstration and skills training on selected variety of preferred
crops, the project had imparted knowledge to 2,000 farmers, representing 66.67 percent of the target.
21
Another effects arising from training is the aspect of enhanced community mobilization and
organizational capacity which is directly associated with capacity building as farmers are being
organized to manage and maintain the irrigation system. Skills gained from improved farming
husbandry could only be assessed at the demonstration plots as the technology is yet to be taken at
farmer’s level. This is because the canals being completed at the time of this review were yet to
convey water to the farms. Demonstrations plots were served by pumps. However, the quality of
farming at the demo plots illustrated good farming husbandry in terms of health of plants and spacing,
management of soils and variety of crops planted and appeared to do well.

It was worthy noting that some of these skills and knowledge were gradually being imparted and they
largely remain as intended in the shorter term basis. The effectiveness of these outputs needs to be
further analyzed in terms of results as outcomes positively affecting the committees’ performance in
attainment of the groups’ cohesiveness and in the operation and maintenance of the irrigation
systems. In particular, the time taken in the training sessions appears insufficient to adequately cover
the ODIS and the specific modules for instance the marketing, O&M etc.

2.4.2.4 Effectiveness in Crop Diversification and Marketing

Contact farmers interviewed registered their satisfaction from crop diversification intervention both in
terms of introduction of new crops and training on improved agricultural activities. Table 6, below,
shows the crops introduced and promoted including chemical supplied by Agrosphere in all the
demonstration plots established.

As per the information obtained from the contact farmers, they had been trained on the following
aspects of improved farming practices:

• Seed spacing (for example, see figure 1),

• Intercropping
• Crop rotation,
• Diversification of crops,
• Application of fertilizer (Cow-dung, like fertilizer, easily found in loco), Kurstaky, against
the stem borers on maize, Nim leaves solution, against the Thrips and cocciniglie on
sesame
• Control of pesticides, and
• Post-harvest practices.

22
Table 6 Planting Materials and Chemicals Supplied

Types of Material Type/Variety

Somtux Maize
Cereals Local Maize
Sorghum
Erect Cowpea - KK1
Legumes Local Cowpea
Groundnut
Onion - Red Creole, Texas Grano
Water melon - Sugar Baby, Crimson sweet
Tomatoes - Money maker and Roma
Carrots – Nantes
Lettuce – Great lakes
Vegetables
Hot Pepper Red Cayenne
Sweet pepper California wonder
Capsicum – California wonder
Capsicum – Red cayenne
Okra – Clemson spineless
Oil crop Sesame
Urea
Triple super phosphate
Copper fungicides
Chemicals/fertilizer
Thiovit fungicides
Victory fungicides
Keshet aphicides
Sudan grass
Fodder crops
Dolicos lab lab

Figure 1: Intercropping maize,-sesame and maize-cowpea

The contact farmers confirmed that once they were trained, they used the skill gained to carry out
good farming practices at the demonstration sites where other farmers from the area come to learning
new skills. Since February last year, Agrosphere had provided 11 pumps to contact farmers to support
practical training carried out in the demonstration plots. This strategy would effectively reach more
people and in a format that the majority of farmers who were illiterate would be able to adapt.

23
2.4.4 Gender and Environmental Issues

Attempts to mainstream gender in the operations of FAO and Agrosphere were observed. In its
training manual, one of the topics trained was aimed at mainstreaming gender roles in irrigation
development. The evaluation team also noted that Agrosphere ensured that at least a third of the
trained farmers are women. It’s however not possible to assess the effects of gender mainstreaming
in skills acquisition and its impacts on the entire management of the irrigation system and in particular
in enhancing governance. This could be possible once the system start operating.

2.4.5 Visibility of EC

A strong bondage has been created between Agrosphere and the beneficiaries as a result of
rehabilitation of canals that is expected to contribute in gaining of livelihoods for people within the
canal command areas. Billboards erected at the project sites bear message of the parties involved in
the implementation of the ARDOPIS project (as can be observed photo 2 below). In addition, it was
observed that officials of the local authority were aware that the activities implemented by Agrosphere
have been financially supported by EC.

Photo 2: A billboard conveying message of the organization behind the project

implementation.

2.5 Impact of the Project

2.5.1 Overview

The evaluation team viewed project impacts as an assessment of the systematic changes in farmers’
lives as a consequence of the interventions implemented. Short and long term impacts, as well as
direct and indirect impacts have been considered in the assessment. Further impacts have been
assessed in terms of their positive or negative effects upon the targeted beneficiaries and the
environment. By the time of this review, no agricultural production attributable to ARDOPIS had
started as the canals rehabilitation was ongoing. For the few canals excavated, other related facilities

24
were not yet in place to allow the release of water into the canals. As such, agricultural related
impacts are basically projected.

2.5.2 Desirable Impacts

2.5.2.1 Projected Impacts from Irrigation Infrastructure Rehabilitation

By the time of this review, only 62.4km of primary and secondary canals had been rehabilitated but
were yet to convey water. What emerged clearly was that farmers were anxious to resume irrigated
agriculture. In Afgoye, the review team found farmers clearing the canals in the expectation that the
rehabilitation was soon to commence. Clearing “would ensure that the excavation, which had been
delayed for more than one and half years, would takes less time once it started” remarked Mr. Ade
Mohammed Musa, farmer in Garlwar village, Afgoye.

Photo 3: Farmers within Acaaye Canal Command area have started clearing the canal in
anticipation of commencement of Rehabilitation Activities.

According to these farmers, irrigation would revive cultivation activities which had stalled for about two
years after the canals silted. The collapse of the canal had confined crop production to the few
farmers who were able to hire pumps. This had resulted in many households losing significant source
of livelihood and rendering them vulnerable. The presence of extensive uncultivated lands did bears
witness of the impact of silting of canals to irrigate to crop production.

Once the targeted canals are rehabilitated, farmers would revamp farming activities which would
result in households’ food security and source of income from sale of surplus yield. However, as
depicted in Table , below, about 50 percentage of the targeted canals for rehabilitation would be
pump fed, thus sustaining high operation cost of the ever escalating fuel prices. This was an issue of
concern to many farmers that would be beneficiaries.

25
Photo 4: Farming is currently restricted to the few farmers who are able to rent out pumps

Table 7: Targeted Irrigation rehabilitation and water conveyance system

Village System Canal

Darasalam Gravity system Hanole canal
Jowhar Gravity system Boley canal
Shaan Gravity system Yaqle
District Wide(Awdegle) Feeder tracks Darasalam, Shaan and
Water harvesting Mubarak
District wise (Afgoye) Water harvesting Galgube
Bode Bode Command area Gravity irrigation Bode Bode Canal
Gobanimo – Isomery - Kabirow Gravity irrigation Gobanimo, Isomery and
Kabirow
Malashoy canal Gravity irrigation Nyirey, and Janale Jay
Deshek - Naftur Qur Demo, Qolley, Gravity irrigation Naftur Qur, Rahole and
Hongore, Dovaley GadudeyYaqjif
Bangeni / Dhygaras Pump fed irrigation Bangeni, Dhygaras, Jamama
District Wide Jamama Water harvesting
Barire Pump fed system Herey canal
Tawakal Pumped system Malable canal
Nuun Pump fed system Sheikh Mohamed canal
Bulo Barow Pump fed Burijibale (Principle) Canal
Sabiid Pump fed Governo canal
Qanole Pump fed Huurlawe canal

Mareerey Pump fed Ashir canal

Galware Pump fed Agley canal
Galgube Pump fed Wadhere anal
Baqdad Pump fed Coley canal
Desheks (Naftur Qur, Demo, Hongore, Gravity fed Naftur Qur, Rahole and Yaqjif
Dovely)
Bangeni, Dhygaras, Jamama Pump fed Geldile
Gobanimo , Isomery and Kabirow Pump fed Gobanimo

2.5.2.2 Impacts Deriving from Crop Diversification and the Demonstration Plots

Agrosphere had managed to establish 18 demonstration plots (see the Table 8) and initiated crop
production primarily for training through contact farmers. It is therefore proper to state that farmers
had and continue to acquire essential farming skills and knowledge in improved crop husbandry and
diversification. This had been helpful to the few farmers who were undertaking crop production by

26
using pumps that were hired. For the majority of the farmers in the project area, it could be argued
that these skills would be a major boost to crop production once the canals were operational and
would positively impact on the households’ food security and income.

Photo 5: Demonstration plot at Johar

Table 8: Demonstration plots Established in Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba

No Location Remark
Lower Shabelle (Afgoye/ Awdegle)
1 Tawakal village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
2 Mohamed canal in Nuun village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
3 Burijibale canal in Bulo Barow village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
4 Herey canal in Barire village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
5 Governo canal in Sabiid village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
6 Ashir canal in Marerey village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
7 Wardher canal in Galgube village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
8 Calgley canal in Galware village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
9 Alifow canal in Baqdad village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
10 Huurlaawe canal in Anole village Demo plot pump supplied in Feb 07
11 Hanole canal in Darasalam village Demo plot gravity fed
12 Yaqle canal in Shaan village Demo plot gravity fed
13 Boley canal in Jowhar village Demo plot gravity fed
Lower Juba (Jamama)
14 Gobanimo/Isomery Using pump supplied in 2005
15- Bangeni/\Dhygaras/Geldile Using pump supplied in 2005
16
17- Borini Iidow /Borini Sharifo Using pump supplied in 2005
18

2.5.2.3 Anticipated Impact from Community Mobilization and Capacity Building

The skills and knowledge the farming community had acquired from the project’s demonstration plots
would enable them to run farming as a business for improved production while ensuring the integrity

27
of the resource base (water and soils). It was assumed that the skills learned on operation and
maintenance of irrigation system and on managerial aspects, would equip the committees with
capacity to manage and run common property resources through effectively managing conflicts
encountered from the users. Moreover, the skills would improve on the allocation and distribution of
these resources, especially water.

The training in O&M would ensure that the benefits from the irrigation system were improved and
sustained as much of the technical skills were owned by the managing committee. In addition, the act
of improved community mobilization and organization would increasingly trigger the process of social
capital building which eventually has the potential of creating a more consolidated and stable farmers’
society in the long run breaking clannism and ethnicity cords. Moreover, management and
governance of common resources, especially water resource and the associated facilities would
improve as farmers become more organized and responsive to O&M needs. Currently, pastoralists
utilizing Shan water pan were paying user fee of 500 Somalia shillings after every 10 days into the
maintenance kitty.

2.5.2.4 Impacts of the Water Pans Constructed

Water pans had brought water for livestock and for domestic consumption closer to the people.
Specifically, the Darasalam water pan had reduced travel distance from 8 km travelled to Shabelle
River to 2.5 km in average. In addition, it had contained farmers within their villages. This time, last
year (during dry spells), villagers reported that they had migrated and temporarily and settled along
the banks of River Shabelle. Also, population was reported to have increased around the water pans,
although the actual increase could not be ascertained.

2.5.3 Emerging and Potential Negative Impacts

The negative impacts include existing and possible new ones are as described below:

• Risks of drowning and attraction to dangerous wildlife:-Risks of drowning in the canals or the
water pans were real and sensitization needs to be done, especially to boys who were likely to
use the facilities for swimming. In addition, dangerous wildlife, like crocodiles and hippos could
find their way into the canals or the water pans. Like in Shan water pan, a crocodile had found
its way into the water pan posing a danger to livestock and human being.
• Vector breeding grounds: - Rehabilitated water canals and water pans could be suitable
breeding grounds for mosquito and other vectors consequently raising incidences of malaria
and other waterborne diseases.
• Environmental Impacts:- Some of these may include degradation of water quality and quantity,
and degradation of the land resources. Efficient and productive use of water resources training
to be strengthened in order to eliminate water wastefulness. Other important indicator for
ensuring water productivity was its adequacy, dependability and equity in the allocation. Lined
canals would increase the efficiency of water flow and eliminate wastes, but the cost was
extremely high and limiting.
• Public health issues-due to lack of proper sanitation, canals were also used for solid and waste
disposal.
• The introduction of irrigation water into a previously arid environment had the potential to
dramatically alter soil and water conditions. Some of these impacts were the direct result of
changes in water flow, others were the results of the interaction between water and soil habitat
and are:
o Reduced flow to downstream ecological systems/users due abstraction for irrigation

28
 o Return water from the project on the natural systems

Photo 6: Farmers have erected a fence in the water pan to prevent attack of livestock and
human being by the crocodile that had swam into the Shan Pan From Shabelle River

2.6 Potential for Replication the Project

Since the main activities of the rehabilitation of the irrigation infrastructures had not been complete, it
was not possible for the evaluation team to make an objective assessment of the replication potential
of the project. Nevertheless, the evaluation team noted an attempt made towards developing and
strengthening the community structures for the improved management of the irrigation infrastructure
to enhance crop production as an enterprise. Building of strong community management structures
would immensely contribute to the project sustainability as well as development of potential replication
of similar crop enterprises in the project area and beyond.

The ability of the contact farmers to adopt and transfer the irrigation skills and knowledge to other
farmers, underlined a potential for dissemination and replication of project. In addition, the project had
an M&E plan that lessons learnt oriented and those experiences were likely to used for improvement
of the project performance in each stage of the project cycle.

2.7 Sustainability of the Project

Sustainability here looks at whether the positive outcomes of the project were likely to continue after
external funding ends, and also whether longer term impact on the wider development process can be
sustained by the target group members. As the production had not started, sustainability then focused
on preparatory activities. Agrosphere had focused on capacity building and organizing the targeted
farmers. It was anticipated that this would translate into an improved management of the entire
irrigation system.

Sustainability concerns were built-in into project conception from the early stages of its formulation.
Attempt towards building sustainability of the project was noted out of the formation and/or
strengthening of the community governance structures and technical training on O&M of the irrigation
system. This would enable the community to repair and maintain the infrastructure internally when the

29
operation starts. Strong management committee not withstanding, the importance of having effective
relationship with the local administration was underlined as one of the challenges associated with the
management of common property like an irrigation infrastructure. The challenge was how to deal with
free riders or utility maximizing members who frequently float the by-laws. A strong support from the
local administration would go a long in dealing with such errand members of the society whose
behaviour might be beyond the management capacity of the committees.

Involvement of the beneficiaries which was a strong underlying strength observed in the overall
design and practice of the project, would promote commitment and instil the sense of ownership. The
context of the project area being arid, the irrigation and farming technologies fits well with their needs.
This was expected to engender commitment and instil the motivation to safeguard and maintaining
the irrigation system. This would be cemented further by the ability of the community to carry out O&M
activities, given that their capacity would have been developed by Agrosphere.

General security in the area no doubt would play a major role in ensuring maintenance of the
developments achieved so far as well as social infrastructure was revamped through training.

30
3.0 KEY LESSONS LEARNT

Lesson learning is an important component of effective project management and implementation.

Lessons learnt should be an integral part in all the stages of project cycle management. A lesson is a
new idea, process, experience or understanding, which goes to improve the way the project is
managed and contributes to greater effectiveness and wider impact of the of an activity. Usually
interventions do not turn out exactly the way they were planned; sometimes the needs are not
immediately clear or cannot be easily understood; circumstances also do change, for instance there
may be new people in the community, for our case, the IDPs who have settled in the project area
running from conflict in Mogadishu, there may be new needs, old needs may have been addressed or
problems might be affecting people differently. In this light, it is needless to state that project must
make a conscious and deliberate effort to tease out lessons, document them and incorporate them
into the project cycle as well as share them with partners and other stakeholders in order to contribute
to best practice and enhance final products. Lessons learnt are more critical for the case of mid term
evaluation as it focuses more on the implementation process in view of improving its performance.
This section of the report summarizes some of the lessons learnt from FAO and Agrosphre’s project
implementation hitherto. It is grouped into Relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impacts and
sustainability of the interventions.

3.1 Relevance of the Project

• Despite the project delay in implementation, farmers’ interest had not waned as the rehabilitation
of the irrigation system means gaining of livelihood, which they lost as a result of silting of the
canals.
• To maintain the irrigation system through out the year, pumping offers the most logical and
immediate solution. The high cost for running a pumping scheme was only possible if the farmers
would be organized/ form structures that would provide for cost recovery.

3.2 Efficiency of the Project

• Strengthening of the existing community governing structures, other than creating absolutely new
structures, will pose a lesser challenge of popularising it amongst the community and other
stakeholders, especially the local administration. Transaction costs will be low as all stakeholders
understand roles and responsibilities of traditional structures upon which project management
committee are drawn.
• Organizing and strengthening the community takes a lot of time and resources. But ones the
community were sensitized and commitment obtained, undertaking civil works was easier and
fast, thus enhancing efficiency of rehabilitating.
• Farmer field school training based approach equips farmers with practical skills, and more farmers
were reached at low cost in terms time and financial resources.

3.3 Emerging and Potential Effectiveness of the Project

• Water pans had considerably responded to people and livestock water needs and was
encouraging settlement.
• The community was getting more organized as a result of the training received as well as the
newly found motivation of ensuring proper utilization of the water resources.
• The irrigation interventions were intended for improving farming practices, intensifying and
diversifying production systems. However, providing access to water for irrigation alone would not

31
 definitely change crop production patterns as farmers will continue applying outdated farming
techniques. Thus, the technologies transfer provided through farmers field schools were absolutely
necessary for impacting the desired change.

3.4 Emerging and Potential Project Impacts

3.4.1 Positive Changes Deriving from the Project Interventions

• Improved farmers’ organization would result into increased social capital building and positively
impact on consolidation of the community.
• The reduced cost of maintaining silt free canals can only come from increased number of farmers
and proper catchment management/protection.

3.5 Sustainability of the Desired Project Outcomes

• It is hoped that the empowerment of the community in O&M would ensure that the capacity for
basic maintenance and repair of the irrigation system was owned and retained in them even after
the project comes to an end.
• Projects like ARDOPIS addressing reduction of poverty amongst vulnerable communities like the
Lower Shabelle and Lower Juba, adequate time need to be availed to capacity building. More time
is required for the community to apply the new technology where backstopping services are
provided.
•

32
4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Conclusions

1. While taking the time planned for completion of the rehabilitation works, which according to the
Project Report was projected for completion by the 20th month of the implementation period and
while assuming, the remaining rehabilitation activities would only be complete by the 30th month,
which marks the end of the project implementation timeline, the project is behind schedule by six
months.

2. The project had hitherto achieved 70.7 percent activities implementation. Specifically, when the
project was assessed in terms of its achievement of the three project results, only 47.8 percent
had been delivered. The civil work had achieved (actual total length primary and secondary canal t
be rehabilitated was 180km), 62.4km that was about 35 percent. If the implementation speed
demonstrated since February 2008, was maintained, the project was likely rehabilitate all the
canals by the end of June 2008, two months before the planned end of the project in August. More
than 90 percent of the results II and III were projected to be accomplished by the end of the end of
the project completion date. However, the regional and international markets would not be fully
achieved partly because of lack time, but also because institutionalizing market linkages would
require time and the environment within the project area is not conducive to this activity within the
foreseeable future.

3. This review has established that local and regional authorities support was essential and
strengthened performance efficacy of the community based governance structures. Its support
was actually a major precondition that determined the performance in terms of project
legitimization. The relationship between Agrosphere and the Somali government (FTG)
administration, had, however, not been cordial, but had improved at the time of writing the report.

4. The Agrosphere partnership with AW-Faqi was a well thought out strategy as the latter had
brought on broad local experience in agricultural extension services as a local CBO. However, it
this relationship was being used for monitoring of the project activities.

5. Skills gained from improved farming husbandry could only be assessed at the demonstration plots
as the technology was yet adopted at individual farmer’s level. This was because the canals were
being done during the review of the project. However, farmers had demonstrations plots that were
being irrigated by pumping water from the river. The quality of farming at these plots illustrated
good farming husbandry in terms of health of plants and spacing, management of soils and variety
of crops planted and were an indicator a potential successful irrigated farming everything else
being equal.

6. Monitoring and evaluation: Agrosphere undertook an initial baseline survey to establish the
benchmark upon which monitoring and evaluation of the project can be measured. The project
had also quarterly and biannual reports documenting the project planning and progress. In
addition, the reports included the challenges/problems encountered in the implementation of
activities and provided recommendations to overcome them as they prepared the next phase of
implementation. This was important as the pitfalls noticed along the way were avoided. However,
no tools for recording monitoring activities in the field were found. As such, the quality of recording
and documentation was certainly questionable. A simplified and easy to fill field progress appraisal
tool for the field officers and the community committees’ representative would enhance proper
recording thus improving quality of the monitoring activities.

33
7. Involvement of the beneficiaries was strong underlying strength observed in the overall design and
practice of the project, and was expected to promote commitment and instil the sense of
ownership. The context of the project being in an arid area, the irrigation and farming technologies
fitted well with beneficiaries needs. This was expected to engender commitment and instil the
motivation to safeguard and maintaining the irrigation system. This would be cemented further by
the ability of the community to carry out O&M activities as their capacity was being developed by
Agrosphere.

4.2 Recommendations

1. The project implementation is behind schedule by six months. The Project implementation
phase was on a crucial implementation phase that involved heavy civil works. While
considering the time left, Agrosphere should carefully plan for the civil works investments and
try to get rid of unnecessary delay, such as delay caused breakdowns of machines and strict
monitoring of works during the construction to ensure compliance with the design
specifications. This would essentially entail taking advantage of the lessons learnt and
experience gained during the implementation process to ensure that care was taken to
“getting it right in the first place” and all the planned outputs were effectively implemented. In
this regards, the project purpose and objective were likely to be realized within project
completion date.
2. The evaluation team noted that by the end of the implementation period in August 20008,
FAO- Agrosphere ARDOPIS project would have implemented majority of the activities as
contained in the logframe. However, activities such as the regional and international market
linkages would largely be left undone. It is recommended the Aerosphere re-evaluate whether
these activities are necessary with a view of discarding them all together. It was the opinion of
the evaluation team that the project lacked the capacity and the environment was not
conducive for promotion of markets and market linkages both in the region and
internationally. This does not however, call for change of the project logframe as farmers are
expected to make use of local markets (village) to sell their surplus crop. Nonetheless, the
evaluation team recommends a-no-cost extension phase of not less than three months. This
should be purposely used for strengthening the capacity of the farmers to utilize, manage and
maintain the irrigation system and would expected to be funded from monies earmarked for
marketing activities.

3. Agrosphere action of amending and strengthening its relationship with the local administration
was in the right direction and should be enhanced and sustained. In this regard, it was
recommended that Agrosphere should foster a good relationship with the local authorities and
ensure that the community structures interact well with the authorities. This will help
community committees to deal with conflicts especially over resource. The local
administration would help in enforcing community decisions that they are unable to solve
internally.

4. Agrosphere cooperation with Aw-Faqi is a strategic direction of resource management and

attaining value for money. Agrosphere should strengthen this cooperation and at the same
time examine ways to strengthen implementation of monitoring and evaluation of project
activities using taking advantage of local skills and experience of Aw-Faqi. This kind of
relationship is encouraged.

5. The Agrosphere should provide for follow up activities to ensure that the knowledge available
at the demonstration plots on crop husbandry was effectively applied on members’ farms
once irrigation cultivation begin. This should be part of developing the exit strategy.

34
6. Monitoring and evaluation: These are important elements in project cycle management. The
aims of both monitoring and evaluation is to improve the overall management of projects and
to enhance their performance by providing information and feedback on the implementation
and the performance of the projects to all parties concerned. But the quality of the monitoring
has everything to do with the quality of the data collected. Agrosphere should design simple
and easy to fill implementation monitoring forms for its field officers and the committees. This
should be followed with design of a simple database which is easily run to obtain results.

7. Right identification of the target community, responsiveness to the real needs and the
technological relevance of the interventions coupled with Involvement of the beneficiaries are
essential project tenets towards creation of the sustainability of the project. The project
appears to have worked on these aspects quite effectively out of the participatory assessment
carried out during the project start up activities. It has also ensured integration of the
beneficiaries during the project activities’ implementation phase. The project should continue
involving the farmers particularly now that the project had reached critical implementation
phases and as the project move towards its final stages. This will allow farmers to effectively
own and manage outputs and benefits accruing from the project.

35
 8. ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE

EC funded

AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF HIGH POTENTIAL IRRIGATION

SCHEMES (ARDOPIS)
OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC

Contract Proposal for Project Evaluation

Terms of Reference

1- Evaluation of Project OSRO/SOM/510/EC in Middle Shabelle (Balad District) Lower

Shabelle, (Agfoye and Awdegle districts) and Lower Juba (Jamama district).
2- Evaluation of Project OSRO/SOM/511/EC in Lower Shabelle (Merka and Qoryooley
districts).

Country: Somalia
Contract Authority: INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION (IO)

1. Background
IO, Agrosphere and CEFA have been collaborating with EC Somalia Unit individually for more than 10
years in agricultural development of Southern Somalia. A series of actions funded by EC Somalia
have resulted in data gathered and kept under SWALIM, bulletins on food security situation in
Somalia produced by FSAU, rehabilitation of agricultural infrastructure including irrigation canals, river
embankment and farmers training in appropriate crop production by both Agrosphere and CEFA.

In 2006, IO, CEFA and AGROSPHERE responded jointly to a call for proposals by the European
Commission, and subsequently won the contracts for implementation of the ARDOPIS projects
(OSRO/SOM/510/EC and OSRO/SOM/511/EC) aimed at rehabilitation of irrigation schemes. IO will
implement this action together with Agrosphere (Lower Shabelle, Middle and Lower Juba) and CEFA
(Merka and Qoryooley Districts).

The main objective of the ARDOPIS project is that household income of rural families is increased
through improved agricultural production.

36
The action purpose is that farmers in the former banana growing regions have access to and use
irrigation infrastructure in a productive and appropriate way.

At result level ARDOPIS is expected to achieve the following:

In the action implemented by CEFA:

1. 4 sub-command irrigation systems in Merka and Qoreyooley districts with a total control area
of 23,170 ha rehabilitated during the project period;
2. At least 3,000 farm families have improved agricultural production through use of irrigation and
diversified crops during the project period;
3. At least 3,000 farm families practice improved soil and water use and management during the
project period;
4. At least 1,000 farm families practice market-oriented farming for 2 seasons targeting local and
export markets during the project period.
5. At least 5,000 farm families receive services through strengthened relevant organization and
administration.

For the action implemented by Agrosphere:

1. At least 150 km of small primary canals and 30 km of secondary canals are rehabilitated;
2. 8,000 ha of flood fed irrigated area developed;
3. At least 60% of the farmer population in the target area have access to adequate irrigation
water and utilize this water appropriately, cropping plans and patterns.
4. At least 3,000 farmers will be trained in improved agricultural practices including adapted
irrigation techniques, through contract with farmer trainers and relevant farmers’ organizations.
5. At least 5,500 farm families receive services from strengthened water users association and
village development organization.

2. Contract objectives

A local Consultancy Firm will be contracted by IO (Contracting Authority) in order to carry out separate
evaluations of the two projects. The main aim is to obtain an objective and independent analysis of
the progress of each project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness towards the expected
impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment should be made on the progress,
achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame as well as
the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluations will also
identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the Project partners and
stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation. One contract is being provided to
cover both evaluations in view of the common partnership with IO and expectations of additional
information to be gained from comparison between the two projects.

The Consultancy Firms responding to the tender will be evaluated on the content of their proposal,
their experience with evaluations, knowledge of the Somalia context and the quality of the individual
candidates proposed. The company selected will be entirely responsible for the recruitment of the
staff/consultants, their travel and the content of the final report.

The Consultancy Firm should indicate, in accordance with section seven below (work plan and
timetable) the number of days considered necessary to carry out the field work and data collection in
Somalia. This is not envisaged to exceed 10 days per project.

A detailed budget/cost estimate should be submitted under separate cover at the same time as the
technical proposal.
3. Issues to be covered

37
The following are some of issues to be included in the evaluations:

• Project design and its relevance - Extent to which the project has been consistent with, and
supportive of, the policy and programme framework within which the action is placed;
consistency between the planned resources, activities, outputs and objectives; adequacy of
the project institutional arrangements.
• Project management and internal coordination arrangements, and the extent to which timely
and appropriate decisions were made to support effective implementation and problem
resolution.
• Stakeholder involvement and participation in the management and implementation of the
project, the level of local ownership, as well as beneficiaries’ satisfaction.
• Performance - Efficiency (input delivery, cost control and activity management).
• Effectiveness (delivery of outputs and progress towards achieving the purpose).
• Contribution to impact, including possible unexpected outcomes or results.
• Sustainability (to what extent project achieved results so far are likely to be operated and
maintained in the long term).
• Cross-cutting issues – gender and environment consideration in implementation of the project.
• Replication – analysis of replication potential of project positive results.
• Quality of works implemented in relation to technical specifications and standards.
• The EC visibility is also to be considered.
• Co-ordination with institutions and agencies (e.g. Local NGOs; Ministry of Livestock,
Agriculture and Environment; INGOs; etc.).

4. Approach / Methodology
The approach should be impartial, independent, and credible. It is expected that the different project
stakeholders will have the opportunity to express their views and that recommendations will be useful
and applicable by the project management.
The consultants are expected to conduct a thorough assessment of relevant project documentation
and products as well as internal management practices. Interviews with key project personnel and
collaborators should be conducted as well as with key stakeholders and beneficiaries

The evaluations should be in line with the EC evaluation guidelines and principles and tools of Project
Cycle Management (PCM). In particular, they should evaluate links of the projects to the EC Strategy
for Somalia (2002-2007) (SISAS).

The methodology to be used in conducting the evaluations and tools for the same, taking account of
the above considerations, should be included in the technical proposal by the Consultancy Firm.

The selected consultants will be provided with the following documents for reference:

• The SISAS (EC Strategy for the implementation of special aid in Somalia 2002 – 2007)
• The project proposals including the log frame and budget
• The project reports (Inception, Summary and interim reports and financial reports)

38
5. Expertise required

The team will be composed of two experts, one Team Leader and one Technical Specialist. To the
extent possible, they will work and travel as a team to cover both the CEFA and the Agrosphere
project activities.

The Team Leader should have at least 10 years experience of rural development project
management with a good knowledge of project cycle management, monitoring and evaluation.

The Technical Specialist should have a degree in civil engineering, irrigation or related field, and
demonstrable experience in designing, monitoring and/or evaluating irrigation structures and projects.

Some experience of similar EU funded project evaluation is required, especially for the Team Leader.
Significant field experience in Somalia would be a strong asset.

6. Reporting requirement

Two separate reports, one for the project implemented in partnership with CEFA and one
implemented by the project implemented in partnership with Agrosphere will be prepared. The
preliminary draft report should be submitted, electronically as well as printed, to the contract authority
within 10 working days following the presentation of findings and preliminary recommendations to the
project management. The final report should take account of comments received and be submitted
no later than one month after submission of the initial draft report. Aspects common to the two
projects should be included in reports of both projects.

Each final report should include:

• An executive summary (no more than 5 pages) focussing on critical points of the analysis with
the main conclusions and recommendations
• A main text, including description of the project and analysis according to the evaluation
criteria
• Conclusions and recommendations
Annexes of the report should include:

• Terms of references of the evaluation

• Name of the evaluators and their company (this should NOT include substantial information
on company activities)
• Methodology applied
• Logical framework (original and updated)
• Map of the project intervention
• List of documents consulted
• List of persons and institutions met during the missions

7. Work plan and time table

The proposal from the Consultancy Firm should present a detailed work plan for each evaluation
which should set out the consultants’ schedule for the following activities:

39
 • Preparation in Nairobi: Meetings in Nairobi with IO, CEFA/Agrosphere and EC Somalia Unit;
review of secondary data
• Meetings with project staff and stakeholders in Somalia
• Field work, data collection in the field and meetings with communities key respondents
• Presentation of findings and preliminary recommendations to the project management.
All the above activities should take place within a period of two weeks.
The following additional activities will be realized:
• Preparation of draft reports;
• Discussion of draft reports with the project management of IO, CEFA/Agrosphere and EC
Nairobi
• Finalisation et presentation of evaluation reports
The final reports should be delivered no later than one month after the submission of the initial draft
reports.

The field work for the Evaluation of the project implemented in partnership with CEFA should take
place in February 2008. Any additional field work required for the Evaluation of the Agrosphere
project should take place in March 2008.

8. Assistance to the Consultancy Firm from the Contracting Authority and its partners

IO, CEFA and Agrosphere will make available the following information and facilities required by the
consultants in the course of their assignment:
• Relevant reports, documents, maps, data in Nairobi and Somalia;
• Office space, furniture, access to a computer, printers, stationery and communication facilities in
the field;
• Project budget and record of expenditures to date.
• The use of project vehicles and drivers in the field;
• Facilitation of travel to Somalia.

40
ANNEX 2: COMPANY AND CONSULTANTS PROFILE

a) Acacia Consultants Ltd Profile

b)

Founded in 1995, Acacia Consultants Ltd. is a Kenyan based consultancy company that specializes in
providing technical assistance and advice in the areas of livelihoods and food security, natural
resource management and social and organizational development. Acacia has profound knowledge
of the arid lands both from a technical and an institutional point of view. It is a full service provider with
access to the management resources required to deploy and support technical assistance teams on
the ground.

Acacia’s Vision is ‘Poverty reduced in the Greater Horn of Africa through empowered communities
sustainably achieving their livelihood goals’. Acacia’s Mission is ‘to provide clients and partners
independent and high quality consultancy services in order to enhance the capacities of marginalized
women and men to exploit appropriate technologies and to secure their basic rights’. Guided by
these, the company has grown from a common interest in the development of livelihoods and pastoral
lands in East Africa. Acacia’s areas of expertise have expanded both geographically and sector-wise
to provide high level expertise in programme and project design, policy formulation, monitoring and
evaluation, training and facilitation, applied research, financial and other services. Acacia advocates
rights-based and livelihoods approaches and believe it is essential to promote sustainable use of
natural resources and mainstream issues of HIV/AIDS and gender into any intervention in order for it
to be effective in the long term.

Acacia’s technical services are offers services in the following areas:

• Relief and development,
• Multi-sectoral Development (Integrated programmes).
• Social Development (health and education) ,
• Food Security, Agriculture and Livestock Development,
• Conflict and Disaster Management,
• Small and Medium Enterprises and Trade,

Crosscutting issues: Acacia believes that it is essential to address and incorporate the following
themes in programmes at all levels, as these are cross-sectoral and fundamental to poverty
alleviation. The Acacia experience and expertise covers these issues:
• Environmental sustainability
• Gender equity
• Civil society and private sector partnerships
• HIV/AIDS

Technical skills and services: The attainment of Acacia’s overall goal is achieved through the
provision of the following key services;
• Natural resources inventories
• Livelihood and food security assessments
• Research studies
• Capacity development
• Programme and project design
• Monitoring and evaluation
• Institutional Development
• Policy Formulation

41
Administrative and Financial Management Services: Acacia offers a full range of administrative
and financial management services in support of all technical assignments. This includes the control,
management and reporting of the use of funds, the establishment of budget control systems to ensure
transparency in expenditure, recruitment, placement and management of personnel, logistical
services and support to field teams, contract management and all associated administration and
liaison.

Acacia’s clients: Acacia has a long history of involvement in donor-funded assignments, and clients
have included bi-lateral agencies (RNE/DGIS), DFID, Sida, JICA, USAID etc), multi-lateral agencies
(WFP, UNICEF, UNDP, FAO, EU, World Bank), national governments (Kenya, Ethiopia, Somalia,
Uganda etc ), international and national NGOs, research and community Groups.

Human resources of Acacia: Field experience by Acacia staff dates back to the early 1980s with
professional involvement in relief and development of over 10 years. There are five permanent
employees of Acacia Consultants Ltd and 30 close associate consultants providing services to clients
through Acacia giving the company an extensive breadth of experiences working in environmental
and natural resources management and livelihoods development. In addition to the core professional
staff, Acacia has an extensive pool of international and local consultants who provide services on a
short-term basis.

c) Consultants Summarised Profile

1) Martin Kamau – Team leader and M&E Specialist: Mr. Kamau is a highly experienced program
development and monitoring and evaluation specialist. He has worked for over 10 years with
communities in Kenya, Uganda, Somali and Sudan as a socio-economist and CBNRM expert. He has
carried out numerous evaluations and socio-economic studies. As a community development
practitioner, he has assisted in developing training manuals to various development organizations and
conducting Training of Trainers for effective utilization of the tools and techniques in the manuals.
These manuals include project cycle management. Recently (2008) he trained CDTF’s supported
forest associations in Nyandarua and Laikipia districts in attempt to promote their planning and
managerial skills while applying project cycle management approach and tools.

Towards the end of 2007 and into 2008, he was the principal socio-economist in the evaluation of the
Concern World Wide food security programme evaluation. He was the Lead socio-economist for End
of Project External Evaluation for COOPI’s Pastoralist Livelihood Emergency Assistance in Sool,
Sanaag (Somaliland) and Bari (Puntland) regions funded by EC; principal socio-economist for the
Evaluation of Plan International’s Family and Basic Community Services Programme and was
contracted by International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED), London, to carry out
evaluations of Agenda 21 programmes of Jinja Municipality. He was also the lead consultant in
conducting evaluations for Early Child Development Programmes, touching on child care; hygiene
(including water and sanitation) and child education projects developed and conducted by SAIDIA
(Samburu Aid in Africa); Water development projects by Semi Arid Rural Development projects
(SARDEP in Laikipia and Kajiado Districts; and Arid and Semi Arid Lands, Laikipia (ASAL, Laikipia.
He has also acted as the Principal socio-economist in numerous Environmental Impact Assessments
and Audits. In particular he was the principal consultant in the Environmental Impact Assessment for
the Alternative Livelihoods Area Economic Recovery Programme, a Horn Relief Programme in
Somaliland.

2) Engineer C.G. Kamau - Technical Expert: Eng. Kamau is a specialist in all aspects of Water and
Sanitation; water resources, water supply, sanitation and other social infrastructure formulation;
design, implementation and operation/maintenance management; Environmental Impact Assessment
and Audit , Supervision and Construction Management of Integrated Engineering Works. In the recent
past he has been actively involved in the Value for Money technical and environmental audit of

42
several water and sanitation projects in Kenya. He has over thirty years’ hands on experience in civil
engineering projects. Among the projects he has been involved in within the last five years includes:
Value for money technical and environmental audit of water and sanitation projects in Kenya. His
responsibility included the overall organization and administration of the technical matters,
Environmental and Technical Audit of Nairobi City Water and Sewerage Company facilities, including
project roads network, Water resources assessment for the Design of 35 m high earth dam serving
Tiomin Kenya, Material Investigations for the construction of earth dam, client- Tiomin Kenya Ltd,
Environmental Impact Assessment of Tiomin Dam Design of 35 m high earth dam for Tiomin Kenya
Ltd., Detailed design of small scale irrigation gravity fed schemes and access roads - covering 400
hectares, Environmental Impact Assessment of roads within Mount Kenya East Pilot Project on
natural resources, EIA of small scale irrigation projects within Mount Kenya Region, Design of water
for low income communities in Meru and Mbeere Districts, Review of Final design of Shire Valley
irrigation & infrastructure roads Project Malawi – 2005 and the preparation of EIA reports etc. He has
worked in Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania and USA

43
 ANNEX 3: EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

According to the TOR, the main issues to the evaluation was to obtained an objective and
independent analysis of the progress of the project in terms of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness
towards the expected impact and sustainability. A substantiated assessment was to be made on the
progress, achievements of objectives and results with reference to the project proposal and log frame
as well as the implementation methodologies and the projects internal procedures. The evaluation
was also to identify and document lessons learnt and make recommendations that the Project
partners and stakeholders may use to improve the ongoing implementation.

To successfully accomplish this evaluation objective, the main methodologies applied included the
review of the project documents, conducting key resource persons with the project implementers in
Nairobi and in Somalia and the targeted beneficiaries within the canals command areas.

Field visits and validation were made to Lower Shabelle Region, specifically in Awdegle Districts,
Honale canal which is under rehabilitation, Darasalam and Yagle Water Pans in Darasalam area. The
evaluation team also had the opportunity to visit Acaaye canal in Afgoye which is planned for
rehabilitation. Direct observation techniques and on the sport interviews with farmers encountered and
validation techniques were applied by the evaluation team. The team employed participatory
methodologies such as Focus Group Discussions, household interviews and key informant interviews
with relevant stakeholders. Project staff, both in Nairobi and field offices provided invaluable
information about the implementation performance and constraints. The visit coincided with the official
opening ceremony of the Agrosphere field office in Afgoye town on the 4th March 2008. This provided
the team the opportunity to hear and assess opinions of different stakeholders ranging from the Sultan
of the Town Mr. Abdi Mohammed, some elders and a government representative from Agriculture, on
the project.

a) Limitation to the Study

The project focused on rehabilitation and upgrading of irrigation canal systems. These interventions will
primarily benefit those farms that were originally served.
It was almost impossible to determine the percentage of the farming communities who currently have
access to reliable water and the percentage that needs to be covered by the end of the projects in order
to achieve the objectives.

Other limitations were:

• Low literacy levels
• Authorities and Governance
• Security situation in Somalia still remains a delicate issue

44
 b) Main Tool for Collecting Crop Production Data (Yields Realized from five
main crops Grown in the Last Season and Utilization Estimates

Farmer Cro Yiel Area Utilization Estimates of the Crops Harvested

’s p d Cultivat Amount Amou Amou Wher Price Wher Price Comme
Names Typ ed Consum nt nt e1 1 e2 2 nts
es ed Store Sold
d
2
3
4
5

45
 c) ARDOPIS CEFA Evaluation Programme

Date Activities Time

Planning and Debriefing Meetings in Nairobi
22/02/08 -Debriefing at FAO Somalia -10.00
Office
-Debriefing at Agrosphere -12.45
Office
-14.25-16.00
Fieldwork Programme
01/03/08 -Evaluators’ arrival from -10.15 -12.00
K50 to Merka CEFA base
-Meeting CEFA staff at -14.00-16.00
Merka base
02/03/08 -Leaving Merka base for -7.30
field visit
-Meeting the committee at 7.50-8.20
Bufow on Market issues
-Visiting Bufow X-regulator 8.40-9.00
-Access roads (Golweyn-
Madhulow & Madhulo -9.00- 10.00
Jerrow
-Tourin Bukoro Canal
(intake to the drainage) and -10.00- 14.00
Reservoir
-Meeting the canal
committee of Bukoro
-Visiting farmers training in
session & demonstration
sites
-Visiting Simsim Contracted
farmers
03/03/08 -Leave Merka base -7.30
-Meeting Liban canal -10.30-12.30
committee
-Touring Fornale canal -14.30
-Debriefing
-Departure to Dar es
salaam

46
ANNEX 4: ARDOPIS LOGFRAME

a) Logframe as designed

Project Description Indicators Source of Assumptions

Verification
OVERALL OBJECTIVE

Household income of rural 1 Household incomes of rural families Baseline survey

families increased through increased by at least 15% compared to reports, Household
improved agricultural incomes before action implementation. economy survey,
production. FSAU and
FEWSNET
reports.
2 At least 60% of the target farm families Project reports,
undertake improved agricultural PACSU reports,
production. FSAU reports
PURPOSE

Farmers in the former 1 At least 150km of small primary and 30 1 Quarterly Progress 1. Market prices
banana growing regions km of secondary canals are reports, final for farm surplus
have access to and use rehabilitated project report, Mid and cash crops
irrigation infrastructure in a term and final allow the farmers
productive and appropriate evaluation reports to break even.
way. 2 8,000 ha of irrigated area developed 2 Quarterly Progress 2. Relief food
reports, final distribution does
project report, Mid not take place in
term and final project area.
evaluation reports
3 At 60% of the farmer population in the 3 Quarterly Progress
target area have access to adequate reports, final
irrigation water and utilize this water project report, Mid
appropriately, cropping plans and term and final
patterns evaluation reports
4 At least 3,000 farmers will be trained in 4 Quarterly Progress
Improved agricultural practices reports, final
including adapted irrigation project report, Mid
techniques, through contact with the term and final
farmers trainers and relevant farmers’ evaluation reports
organization
5 At least 5,500 farm families receive 5 Quarterly Progress
services from strengthened water reports, final
users associations and village project report, Mid
development term and final
evaluation reports
EXPECTED RESULTS

1 Selected irrigation systems 1.1 Number of infrastructures 1 Quarterly reports, Favourable

are rehabilitated and rehabilitated. appraisal report climatic
functional. 2 Quarterly reports conditions (no
1.2 Kms of canals rehabilitated. extraordinary
floods)
1.3 Number of hectares under irrigation 3 Quarterly reports

47
 Project Description Indicators Source of Assumptions
Verification
2 Improved agricultural 2.1 Number of trained farmers involved 1 Quarterly report, Security prevails
production using irrigation in sustainable crop production baseline survey
and diversified cropping is report
practised on traditional farm 2.2 Number of varieties selected for crop 2 Quarterly report,
land. diversification activity report

2.3 Itemised Production (tonnage) 3 Quarterly report,

available for local, regional and needs assessment
international markets report

3 Relevant organisations and
administrations
strengthened to fulfil their
functional role.
3.1 Number of organizations identified 1 Quarterly report Market niche
and supported by the project exist regional
and
3.2 Status of rural growth linkages Quarterly report internationall
(consumption linkages, backwards y.
production linkages and forward
production linkages)

48
 b) ARDOPIS Implementation Achievements: Outputs for Measuring Project
implementation Effectiveness

Activities, description Remarks Estimated achievements %

realized
0 Overall Inception Done Completed 100
Phase/IP coverage (LoAs
FAO – AGROSPHERE
no. 1, 2)
0 Start-up activities/ Staff Done Completed 100
recruitment
0 Start-up Activities/ Project Done Completed 100
office in Lower Juba
operational
0 Start-up Activities/ Project Completed 100
Office in Lower Shabele
operational
0 Together with local Done Completed 100
stakeholders hold
validation workshops
where the
appropriateness of the
proposed activities will be
reviewed.
1.1.a Through PRA and Done Completed 100
together with participating
farm families
determine/revise/prioritize
project activities.
1.1.b Together with participating Done Completed 100
farm families determine
flood fed irrigation
infrastructure systems to
be rehabilitated
1.2 Undertake technical Done 12 out o 17 systems 85
appraisal of hydraulic appraised in Lower Shabelle
structures including as well as 5 out of 6 systems
intakes and culverts within in Lower Juba
selected system(s).
1.3 Undertake assessment of Done Done for the 10 systems in 100
pumping sets requirement Lower Shabelle and 2
for systems included in systems in Lower Juba
the community action
plans (CAP).
1.4 Undertake necessary Ongoing Survey done for 6 out o 17 85
survey – topographic or systems in Lower Shabelle
profile for the selected and 5 out of 6 systems
infrastructure including completed in Lower Juba
irrigated areas, roads,
canals, drains, culverts

49
 and reservoirs.
1.5 Design and prepare BoQs Ongoing Designs and BoQs prepared 75
for selected flood fed for 12 out of 17 systems in
(deshek) irrigation Lower Shabelle and 5 out of 6
infrastructure systems systems completed in Lower
Juba
1.6.a Contract, undertake and Ongoing Contracting done for 7 out of 32.8
supervise infrastructure 17 systems and works started
rehabilitation. in 6 systems in Lower
Shabelle and started in 4 out
of 6 in Lower Juba
1.6.b Provide irrigation pump- Not foreseen Not expected in the report 0
sets to selected for the period period
groups
1.7 In collaboration with FAO Continuous canals to be improved have 50
implemented EC funded been mapped. Areas for
SWALIM gather relevant cropping to be mapped in the
soil and water use and coming periods.
management information.
1.8 Adapt farmers’ training Done Training manual prepared and 100
package for appropriate in use for training
soil and water use and
management.
1.9 Undertake farmers’ Ongoing The number is expected to 75
training on appropriate soil jump up fast in the next
and water use and periods as the activities move
management. from demo plots to farmers
farms
1.10 Facilitate strengthening/ Ongoing 16 out of 16 systems done in 75
establishment of Lower Shabelle and 10 out of
functional water users 15 systems started in Lower
association. Juba
1.11 Facilitate development of Ongoing Traditional by-laws identified, 50
water users’ by-laws. formal bylaws formulated and
ready for dissemination to all
water committees
2.1 Undertake a target area Done. Completed 100
community baseline
survey (Complete
baseline survey for the
specific beneficiaries).
2.2 Undertake training of staff Done Completed 100
in participatory
approaches including
PRA, participatory
Monitoring & Evaluation
2.3 Through participatory Done. Done in 18 sites 86
process determine Ongoing for
preferred crops (food, fruit new crops
trees, cash crops &
forage) to include in the
cropping systems.

50
2.4 Undertake local markets To be done 0% 0
survey for farm produce by FAO and
based on preferred crops. CEFA
2.5 Together with farming Done Done for 7 villages in Awdegle 82
communities in the target 6 villages in Afgoye and 5 out
area select representative of 9 locations in Jamama
contact farmers (to be
trained as village based
group)
2.6 Procure planting materials Continuous Done for 7 villages in Awdegle 82
(seeds / seedling) and 6 villages in Afgoye and 5 out
other farm inputs for of 9 locations in Jamama
different varieties of
preferred crops.
2.7 Undertake adaptive test Ongoing, a Done in 18 sites. To start for 86
trials for the different continuous other sites in next report
varieties of preferred process period
crops.
2.8 Develop modules for crop Ongoing Training module done in 100
diversification. conjunction with CEFA
2.9 Undertake demonstration Ongoing, a 2000 farmers trained on crop 36
and skills training continuous production aspects
sessions on selected process
variety of preferred crops.
2.10 Selection of multiplication Ongoing, a Materials for planting has 100
materials for selected continuous been selected based on food
variety of preferred crops. process security and markets
2.11 Distribute preferred plant Ongoing, a Done on 18 sites where 86
materials and train continuous demonstration and training on
farmers on appropriate process crop production is going on
cropping systems
2.12 Continuous assessment of Ongoing
market situation (informally)
2.13 Together with the selected Ongoing in Started and ongoing on the 18 86
representative contact demonstration items where demo plots and
farmers prepare and plots practical training has been
implement production started.
schedules based on
different selected crops.
2.14 Develop and implement Started Started in 3 sites out of 18 19
cropping patterns possible sites. To receive
incorporating fodder trees more attention in the
and forage crops that remaining part of project
maximize farm incomes
and natural resource
conservation.
2.15 Harmonize local and Not done Not possible under the 0
international market (awaiting prevailing security situation in
survey results (in CEFA and Somalia
consultation with EC- FAO studies)
funded CEFA-
implemented ad hoc

51
 project)
3.1 Together with target Done. Existing organizations have 80
communities identify and Ongoing for been identified. New
appraise capacity of emerging institutions are expected to
relevant service and institutions emerge during project period
support organizations and
including water users, organizations
marketing, village
development committees,
professional associations
and farm input services
providers
3.2.a Undertake a study of Done in Completed 100
target area community collaboration
social groups and their with FAO
interactions.
3.2.b Undertake a study on Not done Not in the original Log frame. 0
feasibility and operations Introduced after inception
of rural savings & credit phase
schemes
3.3 Support strengthening Ongoing, a Training of farmer and water 50
(capacity building) of continuous committees associations has
organizations identified process been started but needs to
under 3.1 and – where continue for organizations to
necessary – be effective
establishment of new
ones
3.4 Facilitate farmer Started in
Discussions on group 15%
organization based or Jamama marketing have been started
private based marketing of in all project villages.
farm produce. Marketing infrastructure to be
developed in the next report
periods
3.5 Sensitise traders and Not done Expected to start in the next 0
shopkeepers on report period when training
appropriate farm inputs moves to the farmers own
farms here they will need
inputs. Currently inputs
bought according to
requirements of demo plots
Average Achievement 70.7

52
ANNEX 5: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ASSESSMENT FOR EFFECTIVENESS

Equipment and works per the Design Achieved Comment on variance

Project Plan Specifications Specifications of
equipment and
works.

Scheme design

Irrigation water demand

Water resources planning This was not No data is available on

carried out (This information low, flood and
is available with probability of flows.
SWALIM) In order to ensure the
possibility of attaining
maximum yields and
returns for the farmers,
the amount of water
available must be
determined.

Water rights Not indicated Sufficient flow must be

maintained in the river
throughout the year to
meet the needs of
downstream users.
River basin study

Seepage losses Permeability tests The design report did

were not carried not provide the
out during the specification for the
design. . canal bed and
embankment.

Irrigation efficiency This was not

technically
determined
Construction equipment

Main canal Hydraulic

performance
parameters were
not indicated
Secondary canals rehabilitated

53
KM of farm access roads
rehabilitated
Bed slope

Embankment slope

Spatial data collected and shared

with SWALIM
Flow measurement

Intake Works

Note that there are no diversion works into the canal

Control works

Water quality

Ha irrigated after rehabilitation

works

Water availability at farm level

Water
scheduling/distribution/operation

Water handling at plot level

Land slope

Drainage

Night storage

Compaction control No specification Proper Compaction is

important to reduce
seepage

Pump house and equipment

54
Type of embankment

Water losses Allowable losses Amount Water lost

per meter length of through seepage is
canal not important in
determined determining irrigation
efficiency
Foundation treatment

Training provided

Handing over

Erosion and sedimentation Sediment load Sediment transporting

analysis was not power of canals is less
estimated than the parent river.
Deposited sediment
reduces the capacity of
canals.
Environmental impact
assessment
Health and Sanitation Domestic water Health and sanitation
supply and training empowers the
sanitation were not community to deal and
provided for. avoid occurrence of
common health and
sanitation problems.
Water related diseases

Food availability

Gender distribution

Progress reports No regular and clear

updating and reporting
procedures have been
established
There is no guidance
provided on how to
measure progress
Monitoring and evaluation This was not a No regular reporting
requirement obligations and
standards have been
established.
Funding for monitoring
and evaluation not
secured
Water users association Quorum not indicated

Productivity (yields)

Crop choice

55
Canal maintenance

No of gates rehabilitated

Access to agro-inputs

Crop marketing

Extension services

Land tenure

Labour availability

Credit

56
ANNEX 6: MAPS OF THE PROJECT INTERVENTION

Map 1: Project Area: Shabelle and Juba River Basins. (Source: WALIM, 2007)

57
Map 2: Somalia District Population and Density, 2004

58
ANNEX 7: LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Agrosphere Progress Report (2006, 07 and 08

CEFA (no date) Lower Shabelle Barrage Rehabilitation Feasibility Study

Project Report (2005) European Community Contribution Agreement with an International

Organization
FSAU (2007) Post Gu Analysis. Technical Series Report No. V.13

Mckevitt D. and A. Lawton. (eds.) (1994) Public sector management. London: Sage.

Paron, P., Vargas, R. 92007) Landform of Selected Study Areas in Somaliland and Southern Somalia.
Integrated Landform Mapping Approach at semi-detailed scale using Remote Sensing
and GIS techniques. FAO-SWALIM. Project Report L-02. Nairobi, Kenya.

SWALIM (2007) Product Catalogue 2007

Vargas, R.R. and Alim, M.S. (2007) Soil Survey of the Juba and Shabelle riverine areas in Southern
Somalia. FAO-SWALIM. Project Report L-08. Nairobi, Kenya.

59
ANNEX 8: DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS
1. Human Resources
Agrosphere
Senior Surveyor 25,200 5,796.33 19,403.67 77
Assistant Surveyors 24,000 14,399.31 9,600.69 40
Local Agronomist 26,100 15,619.59 10,480.41 40
Field Technicians/ Trainers 43,500 18,304.21 25,195.79 58
Capacity Building Manager 18,850 8,440.27 10,409.73 55
Local Agronomist & Focal point Balad 26,100 5,287.88 20,812.12 80
Local Administrator 15,950 13,667.14 2,282.86 14
Accountant 14,500 6,874.25 7,625.75 53
Data entry clerk 10,150 1,871.10 8,278.90 82
Security 36,000 21,025.44 14,974.56 42
Cook 5,075 4,068 1,007.40 20
Waiter 2,900 2,900.00 100
Cleaner-Residence 2,900 1,594.50 1,305.50 45
Cleaner-offices 2,900 520.65 2,379.35 82
Generator Operators & general maintenance 2,900 1,928.04 971.96 34
Technical manager- Engineering 174,000 145,457.46 28,542.54 16
Agronomist 90,000 95,572.56 -5,572.56 -6
50% Deputy Coordinator (Finance/HR) 72,000 68,980.03 3,019.97 4
Expatriate Per diem (in Somalia if night
speny) 3,570 2,159.08 1,410.92 40
Local (staff assigned to the action,if night out
spent) 840 130.16 709.84 85
597,435 431,696 165,739.40 28
FAO
Project Assistant 4,800 6,197.28 -1,397.28 -29
Driver/messenger 4,800 1,663.58 3,136.42 65
Project Coordinator-FAO Nairobi 28,500 36,093.49 -7,593.49 -27
Logistics and oversight, 75% in field 37,500 30,437.45 7,062.55 19
75,600 74,392 1,208.20 2
Sub Total 673,035 506,087 166,947.60 25
2. Travel
Shared by FAO and Agrosphere
International Travel (from place of
recruitment) 7,500 7,302.50 197.50 3
Airport taxes and visa 2,000 2,444.63 -444.63 -22
Local transportation 4,500 1,226.80 3,273.20 73
Sub Total 14,000 10,973.93 3,026.07 22
3. Equipment and Supplies
FAO
Rent of vehicles including fuel 130,500 69,916.76 60,583.24 46
LCD projector 1,600 996.55 603.45 38
Laptop computers 5,000 5,723.20 -723.20 -14
Desk top computers 1,400 6,853.71 -5,453.71 -390
Printers 800 784.62 15.38 2
Photocopier 4,000 1,218.01 2,781.99 70
Thuraya 2,000 95.29 1,904.71 95
VHF radio-Handsets 2,130 4,459.13 -2,329.13 -109

60
VHF base 700 719.73 -19.73 -3
VHF Mobile units 790 623.91 166.09 21
GPS 1,050 1,972.91 -922.91 -88
Survey levels 1,000 1,000.00 100
Salinity meter 200 200.00 100
Soil auger 200 200.00 100
Digital camera 1,500 2,278.63 -778.63 -52
Spare parts/equipment for machine, tools 14,500 290.43 14,209.57 98
Generators 4,800 4,800.00 100
Purchase of motor cycles 14,000 6,782.32 7,217.68 52
Sub Total 186,170 102,715.20 83,454.80 45
4. Local Office-Action Cost
FAO
Contributions, cost sharing on UN security
etc 3,000 498.24 2,501.76 83
Motor cycle running cost 4,350 2,023.23 2,326.77 53
Office rent- Shabelle 20,300 2,684.62 17,615.38 87
27,650 5,206 22,443.91 81
Shared by FAO and Agrosphere
Consumables- office supplies 14,500 11,326.56 3,173.44 22
Other services (tel/fax, electricity,
maintenance) 20,300 14,557.28 5,742.72 28
34,800 25,884 8,916.16 26
Sub Total 62,450 31,090 31,360.07 50
5. Other Costs, Services
FAO
Short term consultant- Crop Diversification 15,000 7,036.95 7,963.05 53
Short term consultant- Crop Post Harvest 15,000 15,000.00 100
Short term consultant- Irrigation/ Civil
Structure 7,500 8,360.79 -860.79 -11
Short term consultant- Soil Science 15,000 15,000.00 100
Consultant- Technical Monitoring and
Evaluation 15,000 15,000.00 100
Midterm Evaluation 8,000 5,856.53 2,143.47 27
Final Evaluation 8,000 8,000.00 100
83,500 21,254 62,245.73 75
Shared by FAO and Agrosphere
Financial Services (bank costs, transfer
charges) 29,000 5,547.85 23,452.15 81
Visibility Actions 5,000 9,088.70 -4,088.70 -82
34,000 14,637 19,363.45 57
Sub Total 117,500.00 35,890.82 81,609.18 69
6. Others-Works
FAO
Irrigation Canal (primary/ secondary)
rehabilitation 360,000 48,122.21 311,877.79 87
Agriculture activities/inputs 183,000 54,480.48 128,519.52 70
Market Development 210,000 12,248.93 197,751.07 94
753,000 114,852 638,148.38 85
Agrosphere
Expansion of office facilities (Jamama Base) 15,000 3,913.85 11,086.15 74
Capacity Building for advisory associations 200,000 144,717.21 55,282.79 28

61
 215,000 148,631 66,368.94 31
Sub Total 968,000 263,483 704,517.32 73
8. Administrative
FAO
Administrative 141,481 71,995.30 69,485.70 49
Sub Total 141,481 71,995 69,485.70 49

Agrosphere 472,025 268,027 203,997.63 43

FAO 1,607,811 702,714 905,097.43 56
Shared Between FAO and Agrosphere 82,800 51,494 31,305.68 38

Total 2,162,636.00 1,022,235.26 1,140,400.74 53

62
ANNEX 9: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED

Contact Farmer Members (Cooperative in Jowhar Village)

Abanur Omar Abdulle
Mohamed Sh. Ali Bube
Mukhtar Hussein
Hassan Sharowe
Mohamed Imam
Awmaye Mohamed Sube
Abdikadir Buto
Kamol Abdikadir
Maoley Make
Alow Aliyey
Ahmed Ziyar
Fadumo Abdi Kasow
Hussein Manene
Ibrahim Sheikh
Omar Sh. Osman
Deynabo Mwama
Amino Muse
Rowday Abanur
Muslimo Shikshigow
Asha Mohamed Bunde
Mohamud Abanur
Kaltumo Madey
Khadija Hassan
Sitey Abanur
Hassan Abdulla
Shan Water Pan Committee
Cunsman Haji Mox’ed Chairman
Aw Aolen Gurey Vice Chairman
Hassan Allow Ibrahim Member
Nunow Abdullahi
Aw Hossman Abdiyoni
Mox’ed Geeolow Aliyano
Haawaray M. Hassan

63