participatory livestock development project (loan · pdf fileparticipatory livestock...

Project Completion Report

PCR: BAN 25314

Participatory Livestock Development Project (Loan 1524-BAN[SF]) in Bangladesh August 2005

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

Currency Unit – taka (Tk)

At Appraisal At Project Completion 1 April 1997 10 July 2003

Tk1.00 = $0.0232 $0.0171 $1.00 = Tk43.00 Tk58.415

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB – Asian Development Bank BME – benefit monitoring and evaluation BRAC – Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee CTA – chief technical adviser Danida – Danish International Development Assistance DLS – Department of Livestock Services EIRR – economic internal rate of return FY – fiscal year GDP – gross domestic product GKF – Grameen Krishi Foundation NGO – nongovernment organization PCC – project coordination committee PCR – Project completion report PKSF – Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation PLU – Project liaison unit PMPC – poultry model production chain PMU – Project management unit PPR – Pertis Petit du Ruminants SDR – special drawing rights TA – technical assistance TCC – thana coordination committee ULO – upazila livestock officer VVPL – veterinary vaccine production laboratory

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ha – Hectare t – Ton

GLOSSARY

Proshika – Bangla name of an NGO Swanirvar – Bangla name of an NGO upazila – Lowest administrative unit next to district poultry model production

chain – Consists of seven interlinking enterprises

such as mini hatchery, feed seller, chick rearer, key rearer, model breeder, egg seller, and poultry worker.

NOTES

(i) The fiscal year (FY) of the Government of Bangladesh ends on 30 June. "FY" before a calendar year denotes the year in which the fiscal year ends, e.g., FY2000 ends on 30 June 2000.

(ii) In this report, "$" refers to US dollar.

CONTENTS Page

BASIC DATA iii–vi

MAP vii

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1

II. EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 2 A. Relevance of Design and Formulation 2 B. Project Outputs 3 C. Project Costs 6 D. Disbursements 7 E. Project Schedule 7 F. Implementation Arrangements 7 G. Conditions and Covenants 8 H. Technical Assistance 8 I. Consultant Recruitment and Procurement 9 J. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, and Suppliers 9 K. Performance of the Borrower and the Executing Agency 9 L. Performance of the Asian Development Bank 11

III. EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE 11 A. Relevance 11 B. Efficacy in Achievement of Purpose 12 C. Efficiency in Achievement of Outputs and Purpose 12 D. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability 13 E. Environmental, Sociocultural, and Other Impacts 13

IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT, LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 A. Overall Assessment 14 B. Lessons Learned 14 C. Recommendations 15

APPENDIXES 1. Project Framework 17 2. Project Upazilas Allotted to NGOs 24 3. Microcredit Disbursement and Recovery 25 4. Enterprise-wise Target and Achievement as of 30 June 2003 26

5. Detailed Actual Cost against Appraisal by Expenditure Category 27 6. Summary of Physical Progress 28 7. Technical Assistance Component by Danida 29 8. Status of Compliance with Loan Covenants 36 9. Performance Assessment of the Poultry Model Production Chain and Beef Fattening 48 10. Operation of DLS Poultry Farms and Veterinary Vaccine Production Laboratory – An Assessment 53 11. Livestock Department and Partner NGOs Collaboration 57 12. Project’s Initial Sociocultural and Other Impacts 58 13. Economic Analysis of the Project Activities 66 14. Actual Achievement against Appraisal Target by Activity 69 15. Project Organization Chart 70

BASIC DATA A. Loan Identification 1. Country 2. Loan Number 3. Project Title 4. Borrower 5. Executing Agency 6. Amount of Loan 7. Project Completion Report Number

Bangladesh 1524-BAN (SF) Participatory Livestock Development Project People’s Republic of Bangladesh (i) Department of Livestock Services (ii) Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation SDR14.427 million BAN 25314

B. Loan Data 1. Appraisal – Date Started – Date Completed 2. Loan Negotiations – Date Started – Date Completed 3. Date of Board Approval 4. Date of Loan Agreement 5. Date of Loan Effectiveness – In Loan Agreement – Actual – Number of Extensions 6. Closing Date – In Loan Agreement – Actual – Number of Extensions 7. Terms of Loan – Service Charge – Maturity (number of years) – Grace Period (number of years) 8. Terms of Relending – Interest Rate – Maturity (number of years) – Grace Period (number of years) – Second-Step Borrower

17 January 1997 3 February 1997 5 May 1997 7 May 1997 19 June 1997 25 July 1997 23 October 1997 24 December 1997 1 30 June 2003 10 July 2003 0 1% 40 10 Not exceeding 6.25% 3 1 Partner NGOs

9. Disbursements a. Dates Initial Disbursement

22 June 1998 Final Disbursement

10 July 2003

Time Interval 61.47 months

Effective Date 24 December 1997

Original Closing Date 30 June 2003

Time Interval 67.13 months

iv

b. Amount ($ ‘000) Categorya

Original

Allocation

Last Revised

Allocation

Amount

Canceled

Net Amount

Available

Amount

Disbursed

Undisbursed

Balance 01 1,170 1,170 1,131 771 360 02 81 81 78 90 (12) 03 17,200 11,200 6,000 10,795 9,149 1,646 04 300 300 287 381 (94) 05 139 139 143 0 143 06 10 10 9 8 1 07 150 150 151 42 109 08 550 550 544 331 213 09 100 100 102 0 102

Total 19,700 13,700 6,000b 13,240 10,772 2,468c a Categories: 01 = equipment, 02 = materials, 03 = microcredit, 04 = support for project management unit and

project liaison unit, 05 = support for Department of Livestock Services, 06 = training, 07 = consulting services, 08 = service charge, and 09 = unallocated.

b Amount cancelled during implementation on 22 August 2002. c Amount cancelled during loan closing on 10 July 2003.

10. Local Costs (Financed) - Amount ($) 9,235,648 - Percent of Local Costs 42 - Percent of Total Cost 31 C. Project Data

1. Project Cost ($ ‘000) Cost Appraisal Estimate Actual

Foreign Exchange Cost 6,587 7,222 Local Currency Cost 35,613 22,112 Total 42,200 29,334

2. Financing Plan ($ ‘000) Cost Appraisal Estimate Actual A. Implementation Costs Borrower Financed 6,100 6,240 ADB Financed 19,150 10,441 Danida 11,200 10,034 PKSF 1,900 1,144 Beneficiaries 1,900 1,144 NGOs 1,400 0 Subtotal (A) 41,650 29,334 B. IDC Costs Borrower Financed 0 0 ADB Financed 550 331 Other External Financing 0 0 Subtotal (B) 550 331 Total 42,200 29,334 ADB = Asian Development Bank, Danida = Danish International Development Assistance, IDC = interest during construction, NGOs = nongovernment organizations, PKSF = Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation.

v

3. Cost Breakdown by Project Component ($ ‘000)

Component Appraisal Estimate Actual Part A. Development of Village Livestock Systems 1. Microcredit - Village Poultry Production 19,952 10,685 - Village Beef Fattening 1,036 751 2. Support Services - NGO Technical and Credit Service 7,976 5,107 Subtotal (A) 28,964 16,543 Part B. Institutional Capacity Building and Upgrading 1. Upgrading Livestock Development Centers 3,102 2,529 2. Diagnostic Facilities and Feed Improvement - District Veterinary Hospitals 467 459 - Disease Diagnostic Laboratories 204 206 - Feed Analysis Laboratories 204 206 - Feed Improvement 72 159 Subtotal (B) 4,049 3,558 Part C. Project Management Assistance - Investment Cost 762 447 - Recurrent Cost 1327 1,636 Subtotal (C) 2,089 2,038 Part D. Management and Planning Capacity 1. Consultants, Training and Fellowships 2,053 5,900 2. Applied Research 842 551 3. Consulting Services for Microcredit 138 43 Subtotal (D) 3,033 6,494 Total Base Cost 38,135 24642 Physical Contingency 1,132 0 Price Contingency 2,383 0 Charge on Bank Loan 550 331 Custom Duty and Value Added Tax 0 324 Total 42,200 29,334 4. Project Schedule Item Appraisal Estimate Actual Establishment of Area Office January 1998 October 1998 Credit Disbursement Started January 1998 December 1998 Credit Disbursement Completed December 2001 June 2003 NGO Technical and Credit Services Date Started January 1998 November 1998 Date Completed December 2002 December 1998 Infrastructure Support Upgrading of Upazila Livestock Development Centers Date Started January 1998 June 2000 Date Completed December 2001 June 2003 Veterinary and Laboratory Equipment for DLS Date Started January 1998 June 2000 Date Completed December 2000 December 2002 Project Management Unit Established July 1997 October 1997 Technical Assistance

vi

Item Appraisal Estimate Actual Date Started January 1998 January 1998 Date Completed December 2002 December 2003 Fellowships Date Started January 1998 April 1999 Date Completed December 2000 June 2003 Applied Research and Studies Date Started January 1998 September 2001 Date Completed December 1999 June 2003 Project Implementation Consultant Date Started January 1998 January 1998 Date Completed December 2000 June 2003 Annual Review December each year Midterm Review December 2000 November 2000 Completion Review December 2004 March 2005 5. Project Performance Report Ratings

Ratings Implementation Period

Development Objectives

Implementation Progress

From 24 December 1997 to 30 June 2000 Satisfactory Satisfactory From 1 July 2000 to 31 December 2000 Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory From 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001 Satisfactory Satisfactory From 1 January 2002 to 30 September 2002 Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory From 1 October 2002 to 28 February 2003 Satisfactory Satisfactory From 31 March 2003 to 30 May 2003 Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory From 1 June 2003 to 30 June 2003 Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory D. Data on Asian Development Bank Missions

Name of Mission

Date

No. of Persons

No. of Person-Days

Specialization of Members a

Fact-Finding 7–26 October 1996 5 76 a, b, e, g, i Appraisal 17 January–3 February

1997 5 80 a, b, d, e, f, g

Inception 23–27 November 1997 2 8 b, c Review 1 7–14 December 1998 3 16 a, b, d Review 2 17–23 May 1999 3 18 b, c, Review 3 19–23 November 1999 4 16 b, c, h Review 4 27 May and 11–16 June

2000 2 10 b, c

Midterm Review 5–16 November 2000 2 22 b, c Review 5 17 June–5 July 2001 2 36 B Review 6 3–20 November 2001 2 34 B Review 7 4–18 June 2002 1 14 B Review 8 17–19 and 24–31 Dec.

2002 2 18 b, c

Review 9 8–24 April 2003 2 32 B Project Completion Reviewb 13 March–14 April 2005 2 64 b, c, i a a = economist, b = project specialist, c = project analyst, d = programs specialist, e = financial analyst, f = counsel,

g = social development specialist, h = gender specialist, and i = livestock specialist. b The mission comprised Arun Kumar Saha, mission leader and project implementation officer; M. Nazmul Alam,

assistant project analyst; and Hafezur Rahman, staff consultant and preparer of the Project Completion Report. Source: Bangladesh Resident Mission, Asian Development Bank.

National Capital

Project Area

River

Upazila Boundary

District Boundary

International Boundary

Boundaries are not necessarily authoritative.

BANGLADESH

PARTICIPATORY LIVESTOCKDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Kilometers

0 25 50 75

N

05-2396 RM

vii

89 00'Eo

91 45'Eo

25 30'No25 30'No

26 00'N26 00'N

89 00'E 92 00'E

oo

o o

89 00'E 92 00'E

22 00'N22 00'N

o o

oo

89 00'Eo91 45'Eo

24 30'No 24 30'No

NAWABGANJ

DINAJPUR

JOYPURHAT

GAIBANDHA

PANCHAGARH

THAKURGAON NILPHAMARI

RANGPUR

LALMONIRHAT

KURIGRAM

BOGRA JAMALPUR

SHERPUR

NAOGAON

RAJSHAHI

NATORE

MYMENSINGH

TANGAILSIRAJGANJ

PABNA

GAZIPUR

NARSINGDI

NETROKONA

KISHOREGANJ

Teesta R.

Ganges R.

Jamuna R

.

Bay of Bengal

Kishoreganj

Kaunia

RaumariChilmari

Ulipur

Kurigram Sadar

Char Rajibpur

Fulcchari

Gaibandha SadarDewanganj

Bakshiganj

Sreebordi

Jhenaigati

Melandaha

Madarganj

Sherpur

Paba

Nachole

Bholahat

Durgapur

Mohanpur

Puthia

Charghat

Kazipur

Bagha

Sirajganj Sadar

Belkuchi

Sarishabari

Jamalpur Sadar

Delduar

Nagarpur

Tetulla

AtwarBoda

DebiganjDomar Dimla

Patgram

HatibandhaJaldhaka

BirganjRanishankail

Haripur

Pirganj

Bochaganj Kaharol

Kaliganj

Aditmari Fulbari

Nageshwari

Bhurungamari

BirolParbatipur

Phulbari

Mithapukur

Badarganj

Saidpur

Shapahar

Porsha

Patnitala

Dhamdirhat

Mohadevpur

Panchbibi

BirampurPirganjNawabganj

Hakimpur

Shibganj

Neyamatpur

Manda

TanoreBagmara

Atrai

Raniinagar

AdamdighiKahalu

Nandigram

Singra

Sherpur

Gobindaganj

Palashbari

IslampurNalitabar

HaluaghatDhobaura Durgapur

Purbadhala

Phulpur

Kalmakanda

Tahirpur

Jamalgonj

Dharmapasha

Barhatta

MohanjanjAtpara

MadanKenduaKhaliajuri

ItnaTarailFulbaria Trisal

Nandail

Bhaluka Gafargao

Pakundia

Sripur

Kapasia

KatiadiShokhipur

Kalihati

Basail

Ghatail

Gopalpur

Madhupur

Muktagachha Gouripur

Ishwarganj

KarimganMithamoin

NikliAshtagram

NasirnagarBajitpur

SarailBhairab

ShibpurKaliakoir

MirzapurChauhali

Santhia

AtghariaFaridpur

Shajadpur

UllaparaBaraigram

Chatmohar

Ishwardi

BheramaraDaulatpur

Lalpur

Bagatipara

Godagami

Gomastapur

Badalgachi

Dhubchchia

KhetlalKalai

Shibgang

Gabta

Sonatala

Ghoraghat

Gurudasjur

Tarash

Dhunat

Rajarhat

Gangachara

Baliadangj

Taraganj

ChirirbandarPirgacha

Sundarganj

Sadullapur

Shaghata

Raiganj Bhuapur

Sariakandi

Tangail

Mymensingh

Netrokona Sadar

Panchagarh

Thakurgaon

Nilphamari Sadar

Dinajpur Sadar

Lalmonirhat Sadar

KishoreganjHosenpur

KuliarcharMonomoron

Khansama

Naogaon Sadar

Rangpur Sadar

Nawabganj Sadar

Natore Sadar

Bogra Sadar

Kamarkhanda

Biswamberpur

Deraj

Salla

Ajmiriganj

Baniya-chang

Lakhai

Sunamganj

B A N G L A D E S H

DHAKA

INDIA

INDIA

MYANMAR

R A J S H A H I S Y L H E T

D H A K A

K H U L N AC H I T T A G O N G

1

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. The Participatory Livestock Development Project was designed to complement the efforts of the Government of Bangladesh to increase the incomes of poor women and smallholder farmers, enhance the status of women, and reduce poverty among targeted beneficiaries. The Project targeted smallholder livestock enterprises among 364,000 beneficiaries, mostly women. The Project aimed to cover 18% of poor households in 89 upazilas1 scattered over 17 districts in northwestern and north-central Bangladesh.2 2.

3.

4.

5.

The Project provided microcredit and related technical services to livestock enterprises suitable for poor households through nongovernment organizations (NGOs), and built the capacity of the Department of Livestock Services (DLS), NGOs, and rural communities to plan and manage livestock-development activities. The Project targeted poor, landless, marginal households, with an emphasis on households headed by women. The Project identified semi-scavenging,3 poultry rearing, beef fattening, and goat rearing as effective tools for poverty reduction, particularly for rural poor women. It was expected that the Project would increase the incomes of beneficiaries by 50% by the end of the Project 2.

The Project was financed by a loan from Asian Development Bank (ADB), a parallel technical assistance (TA) grant from Danish International Development Assistance (Danida), and contributions from the Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), the Government, and beneficiaries. The TA covered (i) consultancy input, (ii) capacity building and training of NGO and DLS staff, (iii) fellowships for higher training, and (iv) applied research studies.

The Project applied an integrated and participatory approach that involved stakeholders through village-level organizations, which acted as channels for delivering services directly to poor households. The approach also sought to equip the DLS to facilitate delivery of livestock-development services through partnerships with capable NGOs.

The Project comprised four parts:

(i) Part A—Development of village livestock systems. This component focused on reducing poverty by working with NGOs to provide microcredit to smallholder poultry, beef-fattening, and goat-raising enterprises, and to provide supporting institutional, technical, microcredit, and training services to poor farmers.

(ii) Part B—Institutional capacity building and upgrading of the livestock

infrastructure. This component focused on upgrading 66 upazila veterinary dispensaries to the level of upazila livestock development center (ULDC). Also under this component, equipment for disease diagnosis and animal-feed analysis was provided for 17 existing district veterinary hospitals, as were seed materials for fodder production.

(iii) Part C—Project management capacity assistance. This component focused

on setting up and operating a project management unit (PMU) in Rangpur and a project liaison unit at DLS headquarters, which coordinated project activities and

1 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana. 2 ADB 1997. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan to the

Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh for Participatory Livestock Development Project. Manila (BAN-25314). 3 Semi-scavenging poultry rearing system wherein additional limited feeding is provided to compensate 20–30%

nutrient/food shortages normally happen under scavenging system.

2

helped the DLS render technical backup services to beneficiaries at the upazila and district levels.

(iv) Part D—Management and planning capacity for livestock development. This

component provided equipment, consulting services, training, and fellowships to staff members of the DLS, PKSF, and NGOs. Support was also provided for applied research and relevant studies.

II. EVALUATION OF DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

A. Relevance of Design and Formulation 6.

7.

8.

9.

The project design was consistent with ADB’s Operational Strategy in Bangladesh,4

which emphasized economic growth, poverty reduction, improved status of women, human resource development, and efficient management of natural resources. The project design incorporated lessons from ADB’s previous projects5 with the DLS. The project design was relevant to Danida’s policies, which emphasize human capacity building and development of smallholder livestock in Bangladesh, as outlined in its Agriculture Sector Program Support.6

The Project was highly relevant to three major development agenda in Bangladesh: rural development, agricultural development, and natural resource management. The project design was highly relevant to the Government’s strategy for accelerated poverty reduction,7 which emphasizes pro-poor rural economic growth, human resource development of the poor, closing the gender gap through women’s advancement, and participatory governance to enhance the voice of the poor. The Government recognized the potential of livestock to generate income and increase employment for landless farmers and destitute women. The Fifth Five-Year Plan (1997–2002)8 was geared toward increasing the role of the private sector, NGOs, and individuals in poverty reduction.

The Project design conformed to the Government’s strategy to harness the full potential of the livestock subsector through creating an enabling environment, opening up opportunities, reducing risks and vulnerabilities, and promoting private-sector investment. Moreover, the Project supported the Government’s priority on smallholder capacity development through community participation and support for extension services, and promoting private-sector-led supply-chain development to generate employment for the rural poor.

The Project was designed to expand the roles of the poor, the private sector, and NGOs in providing extension services and microcredit input supplies, while reorienting the role of the DLS. The Project was designed based on available knowledge and sought to apply a system

4 ADB. 1993. The Operational Strategy in Bangladesh. Manila. 5 BAN-374 (ADB. 1978. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan

and Technical Assistance Grants to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Livestock Services Development and Training Project. Manila from 1978 to 1985; and BAN-733 (ADB. 1984. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan and a Grant to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Second Livestock Development Project). Manila from 1985 to 1995. Lessons learned included capacity development of executing and implementing agencies and establishment of workable partnership amongst service providers are very important.

6 Danida. 2000. Agricultural Sector Program Support. Dhaka, Danida. 7 Government of Bangladesh. 2004. Unlocking the Potential: National Strategy for Accelerated Poverty Reduction

(Draft). 8 Government of Bangladesh.1998. The Fifth Five-Year Plan 1997–2002. Dhaka.

3

learning approach.9 ADB adopted lessons learned during previous projects and drew heavily on an in-depth feasibility study that analyzed various issues and needs, including those of the different stakeholders.10 B. Project Outputs 10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

A comparison between project targets and project outputs is in Appendix 1. The outputs were generally satisfactory. An assessment of the outputs of each component is briefly explained below: 1. Development of Village Livestock Systems a. Microcredit for Livestock Enterprises

The Project included a credit component of $17.20 million (Tk739.60 million) at appraisal for 364,000 beneficiaries. The Government borrowed the money from ADB at 1% annual service charge and on-lent it to PKSF, which disbursed it to partner NGOs at an interest rate of 6.5%. The NGOs subsequently lent to beneficiaries at an interest rate of 15%. PKSF requested only $9.15 million (Tk474.32 million11) from ADB. Credit demand was met from the increased revolving fund generated out of this fund, and from PKSF’s own contribution. PKSF recruited 10 national NGOs in August 1998, 1 year after signing the loan agreement; all 89 upazilas were allocated to the selected NGOs (Appendix 2). As envisaged under the Project, NGOs established 60 area offices and staffed them through fresh recruitment or transfer of staff. PKSF disbursed Tk593.9 million ($11.46 million11) to the partner NGOs; the NGOs disbursed Tk2.132 billion ($36.5 million) to 335,230 beneficiaries (Appendix 4).

The partner NGOs lent more than they borrowed. This was possible due to the revolving nature of the credit fund and the NGOs' use of their own funds to fulfill the target by June 2003. Out of Tk2.132 billion disbursed, NGOs had recovered Tk2,075.30 billion, or 93.3%, as of June 2003 (Table A3.2, Appendix 3). The average microcredit disbursement per area office was Tk35.53 million ($0.68 million11), while the average per beneficiary was Tk6,334 ($122.6811). Women received 97.4% of the microcredits. NGOs' repayment rates ranged from 89% to 100% (Table A3.1, Appendix 3).

Most of the beneficiaries welcomed the 15% flat annual interest rate available under the Project, which compared favorably with the 10% monthly interest rates offered by local lenders. While some local banks lend at interest rates as low 10% annually, those rates come with many strings attached, such as prohibitive collateral requirements. However, the bi-weekly installment payments required under the Project loans were regarded as onerous, since they forced many borrowers to make payments when their enterprises were not in production.

Seven enterprises within the poultry model production chain (PMPC) (see Figure A9.1, Appendix 9,) which constituted the bulk of the packages, were less successful because of variations in income and a lack of synchronization among these enterprises. Chick rearers, feed sellers, and egg sellers were successful in adopting the technologies and accruing benefits. Poultry workers, who acquired adequate skills in maintaining cold-chain systems for vaccination

9 System learning approach involves stakeholders’ participation that includes identification of problems, assessing need, framing activities plan, and finding suitable solution(s).

10 ADB. 1997. Technical Assistance to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Third Livestock Development Project. Manila (TA No. 2426-BAN).

11 Average conversion rate $1=Tk51.84 during project period (1997 to 2003) was used.

4

and who maintained good relationships with the upazila livestock officers (ULOs), benefited economically by rendering services to the beneficiaries. 15.

16.

17.

18.

The mini hatchery was the weakest enterprise in the PMPC and only a few were successfully operated. Most of the model breeders were not successful because of low and uncertain egg prices in rural areas. Key rearers were the most complex group. Attempts to rear Sonali12 and local birds using semi-scavenging feeding methods and the day sheltering system13 were not successful (Appendix 9). In many cases, the orientation on technology transfer was not uniform for all NGO field staff and consequently failed to disseminate the technologies appropriately. NGOs employed only one program assistant for approximately every 500 beneficiaries. These assistants were responsible for performing social mobilization, loan management, and technology transfer and monitoring. Since credit delivery and installment collection were mandatory, they had barely 20% of their time to spend on technology transfer and monitoring.14 Nevertheless, many beneficiaries managed to adopt appropriate technologies and tailor them to their business. For instance microcredit disbursement for goats was restricted until a vaccine for PPR15 became available. Nonetheless, beneficiaries who acquired goat packages managed to successfully enhance their incomes through ensuring better feeding and health care management practices. Other beneficiaries effectively adopted beef-fattening enterprises by rearing 2–3 cattle at a time to maximize profit.

As per the loan agreement, only small NGOs recruited technical area officers, whereas big NGOs like the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee and Proshika used existing core technical officers stationed at headquarters in Dhaka to serve as transitional technical area officers. Technical area officers recruited by smaller NGOs departed within two years for better-paying jobs. No NGOs recruited technically qualified program officers. Instead they used their existing credit program officers as technical program officers. Further details are in Appendix 11. b. Support Services for NGO Network Expansion

Ten NGOs were provided with vans (one for every two area offices). Each area office was provided with two motorcycles plus 2 years' worth of rent, officer wages and operating funds. These NGOs organized 13,640 village organizations and enrolled 391,101 beneficiaries from various enterprises. PKSF disbursed the first credit installment to the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee in November 1998, but because of lengthy preparatory works and unprecedented floods in 1998 the beneficiaries began to receive credits through NGOs only in early 1999, one-and-a-half years after the signing of the loan agreement.

The village organizations organized by the NGOs were effective and instrumental in motivating beneficiaries to adopt improved livestock- and poultry-feeding and vaccination methods. They also helped beneficiaries get into the habit of saving money and helped them not only access credit but also use it responsibly. They taught enrolled farmers, especially women, methods of rearing livestock, including poultry. Earnings from these income-generating activities (which averaged Tk386 to Tk3,120 per month) empowered beneficiaries and raised their status within the family. (Table A12.2, Appendix 12). The village organizations also held biweekly meetings that allowed beneficiaries to interact and work together to identify problems, find solutions, and assess services related to their livestock and poultry enterprises.

12 Sonali is a hybrid developed from crossing Fayoumi with Rhode Island Red (RIR); it is considered a suitable semi-scavenging breed.

13 Day sheltering is a part of semi-scavenging poultry rearing, wherein, birds are put in a small house for 1-2 hours for supplementary feeding.

14 PCR Mission findings. 15 PPR stands for “Pestis Petil du Ruminants”, a viral disease of goat.

5

2. Institutional Capacity Building and Upgrading of the Livestock Infrastructure

a. Livestock Development Centers 19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

Under the Project, 66 ULDCs were constructed with government funding and furnished with refrigerators and other equipment. The Project also established 17 district diagnostic centers within district livestock office buildings. These were equipped with diagnostic and feed-analysis facilities, which are now operational but can provide only limited services due to high staff turnover and low operating budgets. Still, the enhanced capacity of the upazila livestock offices has improved treatment services using diagnosis to about 30 ruminants and two to three birds per day. Moreover, vaccine cold chain maintenance has also improved to a satisfactory level. Funds were also provided for the procurement of motorcycles for the upazila livestock offices and 17 pickup vans. The project appraisal called for 132 motorcycles, but the Ministry of Finance failed to approve the purchase of 40 of these (Appendix 6).

The district diagnostic centers had limited capacity because of a shortage of operating funds and a lack of scientists. Feed was rarely analyzed in these centers, while only a few blood and faecal samples were examined per month. Nevertheless, around 20 birds, mostly from small-scale commercial farms, were autopsied per month. Few NGOs took the initiative to make proper use of these facilities. It is possible that many were unaware of the existence of the centers. The activities of district livestock officers at the centers were also constrained because the vans were often unavailable.16

The PMU procured 40 tons of maize, 10 tons of cowpea, and 10 tons of Khesari (a pulse Lathyrus sativus), which it distributed in equal amounts to 89 upazilas. These were subsequently distributed to about 6,000 livestock rearers at the rate of Tk10 per kg. The DLS fodder farm at Rajshahi and the Savar breeding farm each received Tk0.5 million for cultivation of napier, para, guinea, oats, and bersem to go toward producing 300 tons of seedlings and cuttings of fodder for free of cost for distribution to around 1,500 livestock rearers.17 3. Project Management Capacity Assistance

Immediately after the loan became effective, a PMU in Rangpur and a project liaison unit at DLS headquarters in Dhaka were established to handle project implementation and coordination. The Project provided the necessary vehicles, office supplies, and equipment and covered operating expenses for both the PMU and the project liaison unit. However, the PMU lacked the support staff to handle many activities, including (i) coordination of NGO activities; (ii) management of consultants; (iii) benefit monitoring and evaluation; and (iv) procurement of vehicles, equipment, and computers. Despite those constraints, PMU staff members made a considerable number of monitoring and training visits to individual area offices. Their reports on these visits indicated that, due to insufficient input supplies, inadequate technical support by the NGOs, and variations in profit margins, beneficiaries involved in different enterprises of the PMPC did not always operate in unison. This resulted in a lack of proper synchronization among enterprises involved in the PMPC.

The PMU provided PKSF with furnished office facilities to establish a monitoring unit. In addition to monitoring financial progress, the PKSF coordinator monitored the work of all the NGOs. The coordinator observed discrepancies in how NGOs delivered technical services, addressed problems of dropouts or inactive beneficiaries, and maintained monitoring records.

16 Danida PCR on PLDP, 2003. 17 Personal communication with both the former project directors of the Project.

6

Management information systems (MIS) were not appropriately utilized, and consequently the NGOs failed to regularly produce annual action plans. Program officers and program assistants lacked competence, while area officers were not diligent about forming linkages between different poultry enterprises. These were all identified as serious weaknesses of the NGO activities. 24.

25.

26.

ULOs and NGO area officers—particularly those from smaller NGOs—collaborated to train program officers, program assistants, and beneficiaries. Bigger NGOs often bypassed ULOs, particularly for beneficiary training (see paras 33–38 for details). Nevertheless, ULOs were always utilized to deliver vaccines, day-old chicks, pullets18, and cockerels19 to NGOs for distribution to the beneficiaries. ULOs also provided diagnostic and advisory services when sought by NGOs. Most NGOs did not involve ULOs in supervising package distribution and technology transfers (Appendix 11). Moreover, the NGOs rarely made proper use of funds earmarked to train program officers, program assistants, and beneficiaries. When such training initiatives occurred they were insufficiently intensive and too theoretical. This failure compromised project sustainability. During the first 2 years of the project, NGOs made use of their improved capacity to deliver inputs like day-old chicks, vaccines, and feeds and feed ingredients. However, they failed to coordinate these activities with other enterprises working along the PMPC. 4. Management and Planning Capacity for Livestock Development

The TA component of the Project covered four main fields: (i) training, (ii) monitoring and supervision, (iii) support for fellowships, and (iv) applied research and studies. The TA consultants assisted the PMU in overall management and supervision of project-related activities (Appendix 7). The TA consultants helped the DLS and partner NGOs focus on the participatory approach for identification of problems and finding solutions, design training modules, and to prepare annual work plans. Consultants also offered pointers on technology transfer methodology, gender sensitization, legal issues pertaining to NGOs, beneficiary compliance, and monitoring and evaluation. Some adjustments were made to the budget over the course of the Project, especially in line with the midterm review recommendations. Danida extended the TA by 6 months, from 1 July 2003 to 31 December 2003, in order to pilot whether input and support services requirements of the beneficiaries can be met locally. Thirty-two local community extension workers from eight upazilas were trained to provide vaccination, primary treatment of poultry and goats, and delivery of inputs to beneficiaries.

C. Project Costs

The actual cost of the Project at completion was $29.34 million. That figure amounted to

only 69.52% of the estimated cost at appraisal, which was $42.20 million equivalent. The actual disbursement of loan proceeds was $10.77 million, which was only 54.6% of the envisaged $19.7 million. At completion, the total contribution from ADB was $10.77 million, from the Government $6.24 million, and from Danida $10.03 million. PKSF and the beneficiaries each contributed $1.14 million. The NGOs, which were scheduled to contribute $1.40 million through cost sharing, did not participate in cost sharing and thus did not contribute anything. ADB financed $9.23 million, or 42%, of total local currency costs for the Project. That amounted to 31% of the total project cost. Danida cofinanced $4.35 million equivalent, or 20%, of the local currency costs. All contributions by the Government and PKSF were in local currency. Depreciation of local currency against the US dollar and PKSF's extensive utilization of the

18 Pullets are growing female fowls aged about 8-22 weeks. 19 Cockerels are growing male fowls aged 8-22weeks.

7

revolving and core funds resulted in substantial savings. $6.0 million was cancelled during project implementation, and $2.47 million was cancelled at loan closing. The Government made counterpart funds available as needed. A statement of actual expenditures by category is in Appendix 5.

D. Disbursements

27.

28.

The actual disbursement of loan proceeds was $10.772 million, which was only 54.6% of the $19.7 million envisaged at appraisal. The Project followed ADB's replenishment system of disbursement procedures using imprest advance. This system ran smoothly and created no problems with fund flow. Disbursement through the imprest account had a $9.18 million. As on June 2003, the annualized imprest account turnover rate20 was 1.42 due to delayed project implementation. The flow of funds, including counterpart funds, was smooth and did not adversely affect project implementation. E. Project Schedule

The project loan was appraised on 3 February 1997 and approved on 19 June 1997.

The loan agreement was signed on 15 July 1997 and became effective on 24 December 1997. The Project was closed on 30 June 2003, whereas the loan account was closed on 10 July 2003. A comparison of the original estimated time frame with the actual implementation schedule is in Appendix 14. F. Implementation Arrangements

29.

30.

31.

The DLS, as the Executing Agency, established a PMU headed by a project director at Rangpur and a project liaison unit at DLS headquarters at Dhaka. The PMU was responsible for supervision and monitoring of the Project. The PMU collaborated with PKSF and participating NGOs in selecting DLS, NGO, and PKSF staff for training, and in selecting reputable scientists to conduct adaptive research. The DLS handled selection of contractors to construct the ULDCs and supply approved items.

As an apex microcredit delivery organization, PKSF acted as Executing Agency for the selection of NGOs and the disbursement of microcredit to beneficiaries. PKSF was responsible for supervising disbursements, recovering disbursements, and ensuring appropriate microcredit utilization.

Project implementation was coordinated at the national and upazila1 levels. Several committees, including a project steering committee, project coordination committee, and upazila coordination committee, were formed to review progress, identify problems, and arrange measures to solve them. At the national level, project steering committee and project coordination committee meetings were held when necessary. Upazila coordination committee meetings at the upazila level were irregular because of the lack of adequate coordination between the DLS and NGOs. Partner NGOs and other stakeholders failed to effectively implement the recommendations of these committees because monitoring systems were lacking and the PMU was often slow to take appropriate action (Appendix 11). The organizational chart of the Project is presented in Appendix 15.

20 The annualized imprest turnover rate is computed as the ratio of total liquidation over the time-weighted average fund balance during last 12 month period.

8

G. Conditions and Covenants

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

The conditions and covenants were generally met, with a few exceptions (Appendix 8). Despite taking some initiatives, the Government has fallen short of creating conditions for commercialization of its poultry farms and the veterinary vaccine production library, as called for in the loan agreement. The PCR Mission made an assessment of the farms and the library (Appendix 10). The mission observed that the DLS faces both financial and technical impediments to retaining the DLS poultry farms and the veterinary vaccine production library. As such there is scope for commercializing them. H. Technical Assistance

Danida administered the TA on a parallel basis, providing $11.2 million as grant technical assistance. Out of that, $7.528 million was actually utilized. Danida extended the total person-months from 70 to 137.4 for local consultants and 60 to 77.3 for international consultants. However, only 132.2 person-months for local consultants and 69.2 person-months for international consultants were actually utilized. (Table A7.1, Appendix 7).

The team of international and national consultants headed by a chief technical adviser assisted the PMU, DLS, and NGOs in reorienting and training their staffs, particularly in (i) adopting participatory approach, (ii) developing training modules, (iii) preparing annual work plans, and (iv) technology transfer methodology and gender mainstreaming. The consultants also helped the PMU coordinate with the relevant projects, produce reports on environmental issues, draw up legal documents for NGOs, monitor beneficiary compliances, produce a “control manual” for poultry diseases, and come up with methodology for monitoring and evaluation.

The PMU consultants, PKSF, and DLS provided 3 to 5-day training sessions to 577 NGO area officers, ULOs and other managerial staff on livestock and poultry development, extension, and project management. The training sessions enhanced participants' skills, changed their attitudes, and focused their attention on field activities. Another 117 NGO coordinators and ULOs received 4.5 to 6 months training on livestock development and extension from Thailand's Asian Institute of Technology and Denmark's Kings Veterinary College. These training initiatives were less beneficial than anticipated, however, as neither the DLS nor the NGOs used their newly trained staff properly (Table A7.2, Appendix 7). Meanwhile, a total of 427 program officers and program assistants of partner NGOs received 7-day training-of-trainer sessions on poultry-rearing techniques. However, this training program was too brief to be effective in sharpening the technical skills of NGO field staff members, most of whom had degrees in arts or finance and lacked scientific backgrounds.

The Project trained 405,96421 beneficiaries in poultry-rearing practices, especially in (i) principles of the semi-scavenging system, (ii) the benefits of using day shelter13, (iii) basket brooder22, and (iv) routine vaccination against highly infectious diseases. The Project also trained 2,130 poultry workers in cold-chain maintenance of vaccines, vaccination, and primary treatment against common poultry disease (Table A7.2, Appendix 7). The training curriculum was identical for all enterprises of the PMPC. Follow-up training initiatives were inadequate, however, limiting the impact of the initial training sessions.

21 A cumulative figure that double counts beneficiaries who undertook more than one training. Thus, this figure surpasses the total targeted beneficiaries.

22 Bamboo made basket, where, 15-20 eggs are placed and a hen is allowed to brood on the eggs for about 21 days till hatching.

9

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

Fifteen scientists, teachers, and officers from DLS research institutes, upazilas, and the Chittagong Government Veterinary College obtained master of science degrees from Kings Veterinary College in Denmark, with financial support from the Project. The master’s program included work on feeding strategies, egg production of different poultry breeds, genetic susceptibility to infectious bursal disease, and epidemiological studies pertaining to poultry. These graduates returned more equipped to help the DLS deliver effective feed analysis, feed formulation, and diagnostic services (Table A7.4, Appendix 7).

Under the TA, Danida gave Tk7.30 million ($0.12 million) to fund seven research projects relevant to semi-scavenging poultry production. These projects were completed by April 2003. Research results were of no use to the beneficiaries, since the findings were available only at the end of the Project. Nevertheless, the findings will benefit future projects and enhance smallholder poultry production in the country.

I. Consultant Recruitment and Procurement

Goods and services were procured without major problems following ADB’s Guidelines on Procurement of Goods and Guidelines on the Use of Consultants. Recruitment of consultants was delayed because of the belated appointment of the project director, a Government requirement to follow several time-consuming procedural and selection steps, and slow action by the DLS. Procurement of machinery and equipment was within the envisaged timeframe. However, purchase of vehicles and motorcycles was partially delayed (Appendix 6) due to a complex procurement procedure and general slowness at the DLS and the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock. J. Performance of Consultants, Contractors, and Suppliers

The PCR mission reviewed the performance of consulting firms, major contractors, and suppliers engaged by the Project. The performance of the consulting firms and contractors was deemed satisfactory, but suppliers especially of motorcycles, equipment, and machinery did not meet quality expectations. The motorcycles were inferior and the biological incubators for the district diagnostic laboratories were of poor quality; some were not even operational. Neither the DLS nor the PMU took adequate corrective measures to make them functional. K. Performance of the Borrower and the Executing Agency

1. Performance of the Borrower

The performance of the borrower during Project preparation and implementation was moderately satisfactory. The borrower monitored the progress of the Project through the project steering committee headed by the Secretary of the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, and also through that ministry's Monitoring and Evaluation Cell. The project steering committee emphasized interagency linkages for improved monitoring of objectives and activities, guided the DLS and PMU on policy matters, and identified and sought early solutions to problems.

2. Performance of the Executing Agency

As Executing Agency, the DLS established a PMU headed by a project director at Rangpur, and established a project liaison unit headed by a liaison officer at DLS headquarters in Dhaka. The PMU project director performed well in procurement actions. All civil works were completed within the project period (Appendix 6). The project director also closely collaborated with Danida consultants in facilitating local and regional training, and encouraged ULOs and

10

NGOs to undertake collaborative activities. The project director was also pivotal in holding regular thana coordination committee meetings, where solutions to various problems were worked out. However, due to the lengthy approval procedure and a lack of adequate support from the DLS, construction and procurement were initially delayed. Due to its assertive attitude, DLS's relationship with PKSF was not always cordial, negatively affecting the coordination of activities. The overall performance of DLS was rated as moderately satisfactory.

3. Performance of PKSF 43.

44.

45.

46.

In compliance with the loan agreement, PKSF designated a full-time, experienced project supervisor in charge of credit supported by an adequate number of qualified professionals and auxiliary staff. PKSF also deployed a full-time project coordinator to the PMU in Rangpur within 6 months of loan effectiveness to monitor disbursement and utilization of subloans by partner NGOs. PKSF established a revolving fund of $2.37 million11 (Tk123.0 million) for microcredit operations and strictly adhered to its standard financial indicators for the selection of 10 national NGOs.23 Both headquarters and field staff frequently monitored the activities of NGOs and checked on NGOs’ compliance with their technical and financial obligations under the Project.

PKSF identified many deficiencies in the work of the NGOs, such as failures to keep financial records and maintain collection sheets, weaknesses in the performance of area officers, irregular and limited visits by program officers and program assistants to village organizations, and weak links between different PMPC enterprises. PKSF’s vigilance positively affected how NGOs performed. PKSF also developed methods to comprehensively monitor monthly credit indicators like consolidated income, expenditures and outstanding credit amount. PKSF also encouraged successful NGOs to make appropriate use of the revolving fund and to expand their smallholder livestock activities to village organizations. Overall performance of PKSF was satisfactory in delivering credit and related services through partner NGOs.

4. Performance of NGOs

Microcredit Utilization. As of June 2003, NGOs had received $11.46 million11 (Tk593.9 million) from PKSF and disbursed $41.13 million11 (Tk2,132.3 million) to beneficiaries (Table A3.2, Appendix 3). This increased disbursement was possible mainly by revolving of the original amount several times. All NGOs utilized the enhanced revolving fund generated from the Project fund, as well as their own core funds, to achieve the target. Tk2,075.3 million ($40.03 million equivalent, or 97.4% of the total) was disbursed to women and Tk56.5 million ($1.09 million11 equivalent, or 2.6% of the total) was disbursed to men. The recovery rate was 93.3% among women and 58.4% among men. Most NGOs enrolled mainly women as target beneficiaries. The exceptions were Proshika, Swanirvar, Uttara Development Program Society, and People’s Oriented Program Implementation (POPI). Targeted men were provided with beef-fattening packages. PKSF's recovery rate of microcredit was 100% for all NGOs except Swanirvar (98%) and Grameen Krishi Foundation (GKF) (89%) (Table A3.1, Appendix 3).

Enterprise Distribution. The number of enterprises among beneficiaries totaled 335,230, which was 92% of the target of 364,010 (Table 1, Appendix 4). Enterprise distribution by Uttara Development Program Society, the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha, Sawnirvar, and Eco-Social Development Organization

23 The important indicators were cumulative loan recovery 95%, debt capital ratio 2.5:1, liquidity ratio of 25% of savings; capital adequacy ratio is 15% (for organization with more than 6,000 borrowers) and return on capital minimum of 1%.

11

crossed 90% target level by June 2003. Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services and Proshika crossed the 80% achievement level by same time. However, performance was only 66% for POPI, while Health Education and Economic Development and GKF registered 70.7% and 75.9%, respectively. POPI suffered an initial setback due to the unsuitability of the PMPC in low-lying project areas. Administrative problems contributed to the poor performance of GKF and Health Education and Economic Development (Figure A4.1, Appendix 4).

5. Performance of Danida 47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

Danida cofinanced the Project on a parallel basis with a TA grant under the Agriculture Sector Program Service. The grant supported training, logistics, and capacity building of participating NGOs and upazila livestock officers in the project areas, as well as capacity building of staff at the DLS diagnostic centers and veterinary hospitals. All training programs targeting beneficiaries, NGOs, ULDCs, and PMU staff were completed within the project period. Danida appointed the international consulting firm Danish Rural Development Committee (DARUDEC), in accordance with Danida’s guidelines for fielding specialists in different disciplines. L. Performance of the Asian Development Bank

The performance of ADB in designing and administering the Project was satisfactory. During implementation, ADB coordinated with the borrower and the executing agencies and frequently consulted with the beneficiaries and civil societies. ADB emphasized institutional strengthening of village organizations through active involvement of NGOs in ensuring technical backup services and credit support. ADB fielded 13 review missions and utilized its previous experience in the Bangladeshi livestock sector. ADB insisted on the commercialization of the DLS poultry farms and the veterinary vaccine production library. ADB promptly responded to the requests from the borrower, Executing Agency, and Danida regarding implementation problems and reimbursement of claims.

III EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE

The design, implementation, and operation of the Project were evaluated based on

relevance, efficacy in achievement of purpose, efficiency in achievement of outputs and purpose, sustainability, and environmental, sociocultural, and other impacts. The evaluation is summarized below. A. Relevance

From appraisal to completion, the Project was highly relevant24 to the poverty reduction strategy of both the Government and ADB. Project components and activities addressed village livestock development through microcredit disbursement, institutional capacity building of the DLS and NGOs, and improvement of project management, managerial, and planning capacity in the DLS, NGOs, and village organizations. Involving the rural poor, especially women, in programs to improve livestock and poultry rearing techniques was highly relevant.

The Project encountered some problems with introducing new technologies into the PMPC. Certain technologies, such as night shelters, semi-scavenging feeding systems, and routine vaccination adopted through skills training of the beneficiaries were highly relevant to the Project. The adoption of the Sonali-Fayoumi breed as a suitable semi-scavenging breed, and

24 Rating scale is highly relevant, relevant, partially relevant and irrelevant.

12

the introduction of prepared feed moderately subscribed to the improved performance of some individual components of the PMPC model. But the seven enterprises operating within the PMPC failed to coordinate their work. The Project's beef fattening component was appropriately designed. Involving NGOs in selecting and mobilizing targeted beneficiaries to create village organizations and ensure credit and technical backup support for enterprise development was highly relevant. B. Efficacy in Achievement of Purpose 52.

53.

54.

55.

The implementation of the Project was rated as efficacious.25 The Project achieved its poverty-reduction goal directly by introducing livestock enterprises to 327,600 beneficiaries (97.4% female and 2.67% male) to project areas, slightly less than the Project's target of 364,000 (TableA3.2, Appendix 3). The Project affected 17.96% of the poor population of 1.89 million in the Project area, slightly below the target of 18%. The beneficiaries increased their incomes by 25% to 94%; the average increase was 42% (Table A12.2, Appendix 12). Monthly household expenditures for food, clothing, and children’s education increased 23–34% (Table A12.9, Appendix 12).26 The Project also provided direct employment to about 1,000 workers.27

The Project had a positive impact on land acquisition, household income, livestock, and poultry ownership, and asset building. Similarly, certain categories of beneficiaries improved their living standards, accumulated savings, increased food consumption—especially animal-protein intake—and increased expenditures for children’s education. Most women beneficiaries strengthened their status and decision-making leverage within the family. Project activities did not interfere with their routine household duties (Tables A12.1–10, Appendix 12).

The Project was also effective in clearly defining the services needs of poor farmers, and in defining the role of the DLS, NGOs, and the private sector in providing various services. The Project was effective in getting poor farmers to participate in the adoption of suitable, cost-effective technologies. The Project also contributed to an increase in voluntary group-savings contributions by beneficiaries, as well as improving their ability to manage microcredit. C. Efficiency in Achievement of Outputs and Purpose

The implementation of project activities was rated as efficient28 in achieving project outputs. Positives included the adoption of PMPC activities and beef-fattening practices. Lateral and trickle effects of some PMPC innovations pointed to the efficiency of the Project. The Project also improved women's access to inputs, increased women's control over their resources, and improved their technical skills. The Project was also a good investment, as demonstrated by the re-estimated economic internal rate of return of 16.78% (Appendix 13). Demand for poultry and eggs increased considerably due to population growth by 1.5% and increased per capita annual income29 during project period. Proportionate availability of both eggs and poultry had also increased due to lateral and trickle effects and kept price increases below 20%, compared with much higher price increases (50–100%) for agricultural commodities like cereals, vegetables, and fish.30 By increasing the growth potential of the livestock sector, the Project created the possibility that livestock and poultry production and employment in rural areas will increase.

25 Rating scale is highly efficacious, efficacious, less efficacious and inefficacious. 26 Danida’s assessment was 25–75% (Impact Study by Danida 2003. 27 Danida PCR on PLDP, 2003. 28 Rating scale is highly efficient, efficient, less efficient and inefficient. 29 Average per capita income now $430 against $380 at appraisal. 30 Mission’s observations.

13

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

The executing agencies gained sufficient knowledge and skills to design and implement further livestock and poultry projects. Participating agencies such as the DLS, PKSF, various NGOs, and Danida had limited problems interacting, due mainly to PKSF’s autonomous character and the independent behavior of NGOs. Despite the shortcomings, the overall efficiency of the Project was satisfactory. D. Preliminary Assessment of Sustainability

The technologies disseminated through the Project were rated as likely sustainable.31 Through various consultations and training programs, the Project contributed to the strengthening of institutional capacity and the enhancement of services-delivery systems within NGOs, beneficiaries, and the DLS. Beneficiaries gained experience and skill and increased their commitment to poultry activities. The DLS’s perception of need-based services changed to some extent; the DLS was reoriented to assume a more regulatory role. NGOs also improved their capacity to reach poor farmers with improved livestock and poultry services.

Capacity-building activities at the DLS and NGOs improved services-delivery systems, but did not do much to enhance the sustainability of the PMPC. The semi-scavenging PMPC model is less likely to be sustainable because the seven enterprises within the PMPC were not equally viable financially or in terms of technology adoption. Establishing linkages between these enterprises was not effective during or after the Project because the PMPC was too prescriptive. Many beneficiaries accepted the enterprises for access to microcredit and used it as a tool to gain access for more credit to invest in other less-risky, short-cycle income generating activities like petty trading or more profitable activities like hybrid bird rearing.

NGO apathy was a major obstacle to achieving sustainability of the PMPC. NGOs showed more interest in credit operations than in technology transfer. They failed to adequately attend to the key rearers, which resulted in less-than-satisfactory interaction among enterprises operating within the PMPC. Interruption in the supply of quality day-old chicks, vaccines and other support services from the DLS affected to some extent the continuity of the Project activities.

More or less independent execution of major activities such as credit disbursement by PKSF to NGOs, imparting training by NGOs and technical services by DLS encouraged many NGOs—especially large ones—to assign less importance to the DLS supervision and monitoring of NGO field activities. A lack of coordination among deliverers of microcredit, deliverers of technical services, and social-mobilization organizations reduced the sustainability of smallholder livestock enterprises to some extent. E. Environmental, Sociocultural, and Other Impacts

The activities under the Project did not have any adverse environmental effects. In fact, the Project’s benefit monitoring and PCR Mission observed that the Project took environmentally friendly measures like recycling poultry excreta and cow dung. These two substances were meticulously utilized as highly effective organic fertilizer for crop and vegetable production. They were also used as supplementary feed for fish culture.

The Project's sociocultural impact was assessed as significant.32 Regular interaction among village organization members enhanced understanding, improved mutual feelings, and

31 Rating scale is most likely sustainable, likely sustainable, less likely sustainable and unlikely sustainable. 32 Rating scale substantial, significant, moderate, and negligible.

14

created social harmony. The Project involved mostly women (97%) in income-generating activities, which subscribed to increase family income and improved women’s confidence for participating in decision making. Women gained a voice in the locality by becoming more aware of their privileges and rights. 63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

Another positive spin-off effect of the Project was that poultry mortality decreased and production increased. This was mainly due to improved adherence to routine vaccination and improved feeding methods. As a result, other rural women were encouraged to rear poultry, in turn increasing their incomes. The supply of eggs and poultry meat also increased in the project area, improving nutrition and household food security for poor households.

IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT, LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Overall Assessment

The Project was rated as successful33 because it was highly relevant, effective, efficient and produced achievements that will likely be sustainable. It also contributed moderately to the institutional development of the DLS and NGOs. The Project met its targets related to social mobilization, beneficiary enrollment, and generation of income through livestock and poultry activities. The Project reduced poverty and provided diversified benefits to the poor and smallholder farmers through increased income; additional employment in livestock enterprises; better prices for poultry, eggs, and meat; improved access to markets; and improved nutrition and health care. Despite the variable performance of different components, overall the Project was considered successful. B. Lessons Learned

The Project demonstrated that it is possible to successfully deliver a large number of technically supported, microfinanced livestock improvement packages through PKSF and partner NGOs with technical support from the DLS. Predetermined enterprises to some extent limited the beneficiaries’ choice of enterprises to exploit local opportunities.

Administering TA on a parallel basis using separate operational guidelines does not help smooth and timely implementation.

Assigning the DLS a more regulatory role in the subsector will encourage increased private sector investment and provision of services. The continued provision of selected subsidized inputs from the DLS acts as a disincentive to private companies.

Opportunities have been created to further expand the scope of livestock enterprises development by increasing production and involving a wider range of enterprises in the sector. Farmers and entrepreneurs are keenly interested in investing in other profit-earning enterprises like hybrid and broiler rearing beef, dairy, product processing, and input supply. The participatory planning process will help smallholder farmers access markets and ventilate their ideas and capabilities.

Compared to the NGOs, the DLS has limited outreach capacity. It is therefore advantageous to use the outreach capacity of NGOs to reach the poor with support services including microcredit. Establishing close ties between different implementing agencies and

33 Rating scale highly successful, successful, less than successful and unsuccessful.

15

service providers at the field level are prerequisites for smooth project implementation and sustainability. 70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

The PMU and DLS did not keep systematic records of project documents, reports, and data. Such records are not available from a single source.

These lessons were adequately integrated in preparing the ongoing ADB-supported project. 34 C. Recommendations

1. Project Related In future, project design should involve all possible stakeholders and incorporate the

experience of beneficiaries through holding more workshops at the grass root level.

ADB-financed projects, including cofinanced projects, should have a single project administration.

Future intervention(s) should promote the role of efficient NGOs and private companies in livestock-production initiatives and provision of services. This will allow the DLS to concentrate on the core tasks of disease control, disease diagnosis, quarantine, and regulatory services. Extension services to poor farmers, marketing assistance, and assistance designed to improve farmers’ ability to access microcredit and other inputs should be continued.

Livestock technologies, social development, microfinance, and agribusiness management services should be built through a single executing agency in order to better attain sustainability.

Further Action or Follow-up. The Government should take concrete action to commercialize the veterinary vaccine production library and poultry farms immediately by (i) further increasing the price of vaccines and poultry products, (ii) allowing decentralization of authority and responsibility to the concerned entities for commercial operation, and (iii) providing an adequate initial operation and maintenance budget with a step-by-step phase-out strategy.

Sustainable Operation and Maintenance. The Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock should make available the necessary funds and skilled personnel to ensure regular and proper maintenance and operation of facilities and equipment provided by the Project.

Additional Assistance. Assistance to communities should be emphasized through training of local community extension workers. These community extension workers should be self-employed and paid by the community. They should provide the following services: livestock extension, animal vaccination, drug supply, forage, inputs, group strengthening, and fostering links between farmers, village organizations, the DLS, and the NGOs.

Covenants. Although the conditions and covenants of the Project were generally met, the borrower should take immediate measures to fully commercialize vaccine production and poultry farms to create an enabling environment for private sector investment in these input productions.

34 Loan 2070-BAN(SF): Second Participatory Livestock Development Project.

16

80. Time for Project Audit Report. The appropriate time for the project performance audit would be 2007, which would provide sufficient time to assess impact of the disseminated technologies.

2. General 81.

82.

83.

84.

A livestock policy should be formulated and implemented as early as possible. The policy should strengthen the regulatory role of the DLS in conducting disease surveillance and quarantine activities and to promote private veterinary practices.

Opportunities should be created for innovative small farmers to promote entrepreneurship development. Integrated training programs focusing on increasing cash incomes, improving primary health care, improved feeding system, and creating more employment for the rural poor should be launched to help reach this goal. Facilities constructed during the Project should continue to be made available to provide technical and input-related services to beneficiaries engaged in livestock enterprises.

Future livestock and poultry development project(s) should offer a more extensive menu of enterprises to maximize livestock-development opportunities. Enterprise selection should be demand-driven and based on local skills. Local marketing opportunities should be fully utilized.

All records and reports related to the completed project should be retained properly in one place so that they can be easily accessed in the future.

PROJECT FRAMEWORK

Appendix

Design Summary

Targets

Performances/ Achievement

Project Monitoring Mechanisms

Key Assumptions/ Risks

Remarks on Assumptions and Risks

1. Goal 1.1 Enhance the status of women and reduce the level of poverty in Bangladesh.

• • • • Reduction in the number of

rural families below the poverty line about 364,000 primary beneficiaries (70% women), covering approximately 11% of all households (3.4 million in 89 Thanas1) or 18% of the poor households in the Project Thanas.

Poverty reduced among 335,230 rural families, of which 97% were females. This amounted to 9.8% of all households (3.4 million at appraisal) in the 89 Project Upazilas1.

Department of Livestock Services (DLS) Project Completion Report (PCR), Palli Karma Shahayak Foundation (PKSF) and non-government organizations (NGOs) progress reports, Danish International Development Assistance (Danida) PCR 2003 and Asian Development Bank (ADB)’s Project Performance Report.

• Government policies and

practices support increased NGO and private sector participation for inputs and services. No major natural calamities affected Project areas.

The government policies and activities supported delivery of inputs and support services by NGOs. Due to severe floods in 1998, project activities were interrupted for about 6 months.

2. Objectives 2.1 Improve the status of women, reduce poverty, and increase employment through smallholder livestock enterprises in 89 poor Thanas in the northwest and north-central regions of Bangladesh.

•

•

•

•

•

•

• • •

•

•

Producer’s income increased by 50% by year 2003. 364,000 small-scale livestock producers with access to microcredit, technical marketing, and organizational support from nongovernment organizations (NGOs), the government and the private sector.

Women comprise 70% of project beneficiaries, or about 255,000 women trained and provided with credit.

.

Beneficiaries’ incomeincreased by 42%.

335,230 small-scale livestock/poultry farmers gained access to microcredit including skill-development training and marketing through organizational support from NGOs.

Around 327,600 beneficiaries (97%) were women.

PKSF, NGOs, and DLS reports; DLS and Danida PCRs; ADB mid-term review and project performance reports.

Livestock enterprises remain viable. Market absorbs increased production without reduced prices.

Interlinking activities within the poultry model production chain (PMPC) did not work very well but some components, like chick rearer, model breeders key rearer and poultry worker remained viable in modified form.

Market absorbed increased production of poultry meat and eggs with around 20% rise in market price—much below than price increase of other agricultural commodities.

Some of the recommended poultry and cattle rearing practices were adapted.

1 17

1 Lowest administrative unit next to district, previously known as thana.

Appendix 1

18

Design Summary

Targets





•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Formation of 9,100 village organizational units, credit groups, and farmer self-help groups.

Improved DLS service coverage and NGO capacity in target areas.

Coordination of activities between farmers, the DLS, and NGOs through participative planning approaches.

13,640 village organizations formed, each comprising 25-40 beneficiaries mostly women.

Improved DLS and NGO livestock services delivery capacity.

Introduced coordinated activities between DLS, NGOs, and beneficiaries through participatory approach.

• Recommended husbandry

practices for improved production adopted. Government policies are conducive to expanded NGO operations and private supply of inputs and services.

Poor women participate, and adequate incentives, training, microcredit, and marketing services are available.

Effective training of facilitators and implementation of participatory planning process. •

Successful extension activities and the training of farmers to new techniques for livestock husbandry.

Trust and cooperation between DLS and NGOs is successfully established and maintained.

The government policies were not very conducive to encouraging expansion of private sector supply of inputs like day-old chicks and vaccines.

Women became increasingly aware of their rights and privileges and gained better access to training, microcredit, and livestock-production technologies. Participatory planning was promoted. Farmers accepted new techniques such as semi-scavenging feeding and routine vaccination, and realized the economic benefit of these techniques.

Importance of frequent interaction and trust between the DLS and NGOs was realized to different extents by the partner NGOs.

3. Project Components/ Outputs 3.1 Village livestock system. Provision of microcredit through NGOs for smallholder poultry, beef-fattening and goat-rearing enterprises and provision of technical support services.

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

• •

60 area offices setup/ expanded by NGOs. About 364,000 families (mostly women-run) receive credit, training, and technical support. 360,000 credit packages for poultry production (including 342,960 key rearer, 2,160 model breeders, 540 mini hatcheries, 3,420 chick rearer,

60 area offices were newly established (or existing offices redesigned) for project activities. 335,230 families (of which 97% was women-headed) received credit, training, and technical support. Credit packages were provided to 315,825 key rearers, 3,227

PKSF and NGO reports. ADB project perform-ance report.

NGOs participate as planned. Danida co financing available. Credit reaches farmers without delays. Adequate growing stock and quality feeds are available. Farmers’ interest is sustained. The NGO system has expanded and is effective throughout project area.

Selected NGOs participated and Danida co financed as appraised. Credit delivery was smooth. Growing stock and feeds were available according to needs of farmers, but delivered at a later stage. NGOs’ delivery network was extended and credit and

Appendix 1 19

Design Summary

Targets





9,000 poultry workers, 900 feed sellers , 900 egg sellers, 120 pullet rearers).

•

•

• • 4,000 credit packages for beef fattening and goat-rearing.

chick rearers, 289 mini hatcheries, 1,707 model breeders, 849 feed sellers, 870 egg sellers, and 8,475 poultry rearers 3,988 and 372 credit packages provided to beef fattening and goat-rearing enterprises respectively.

Training and credit are delivered on time. Reduced disease incidence in goats following research activities.

training services were delivered as per schedule. Threats from Pertis Petit du Ruminants (PPR) in goats remained as vaccine production did not become effective.

3.2 Institutional capacity building. Strengthening Thana livestock development centers and diagnostic capacity of DLS; provision of support for field activities of the DLS.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

66 thana livestockdevelopment centers established or converted from Thana veterinary dispensaries. 17 district veterinary hospitals equipped. 17 disease diagnostic labs equipped. 17 livestock feed-analysis labs equipped. Distribution of imported fodder seed to farmers.

66 thana livestockdevelopment centers established. Upgrading of 17 district veterinary hospitals into diagnostic centers was completed; centers were equipped with diagnostic and feed analysis facilities. 60 tons improved-variety fodder seeds distributed to farmers.

DLS, project management unit (PMU) and NGOs reports.

Allocation of required funds by Government. DLS effectively implements the upgrading. Effective procurement by DLS and supply by contractors. Seed imported as required and protected from pests and pilfering.

Required fund allocated and utilized in due time.

Construction and procurement completed on time. Allocated amount of seed procured and distributed at a later stage of the Project.

3.3 Project Management. Establishment andstrengthening of project management facilities including training of project staff.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Establishment and effective operation of PMU at Rangpur and project liaison unit (PLU) at DLS headquarters in Dhaka. Provision of materials and equipment. Supply of 17 pickup vans for district staff. Supply of 89 motorcycles for thana staff. Five parent district offices provided with computer and printer. Training of project staff.

PMU at Rangpur and PLU at DLS headquarters in Dhaka became functional as per schedule. Procurement of 17 pickup vans, 90 motorcycles and computer plus printers for 5 district offices was completed as scheduled.

Forty motorcycles could not be procured due to non-approval of Ministry of Finance.

Training of project staff completed.

DLS, PMU progress reports, and the DLS PCR.

Full acceptance by the Government of Project design and objectives. Appointment of suitably qualified project staff. Effective procurement by the DLS and supply by contractors; travel allowance provided by the DLS to facilitate private ownership of motorcycles by staff. Appointment of suitable consultants, funded by Danida. Responsive attitude of DLS management and staff is required.

The Government accepted project design and objectives, appointed project staff. Implemented accordingly but the DLS provided insufficient operational funds, travel costs, and for the upazila motorcycles.

Danida appointed experienced consultants.

The DLS was responsive but slow on many occasions.

Appendix 1

20

Design Summary

Targets





3.4 Management and planning capacity. Institutional strengthening through provision of equipment, consulting services, support for applied research, and training and fellowships for Project, DLS, PKSF, and NGOs staff.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Effective project benefit monitoring and evaluation (BME) system implemented. DLS and NGO delivery systems strengthened in 89 thanas. Number of NGOs participating in livestock development increased and DLS services improved. 136 personmonths (66 international and 70 domestic) of consultant services provided DLS staff trained in participatory process approach.

Participation of private sector and NGOs in smallholder livestock production.

Phased commercialization of DLS vaccine production activities. Phased removal of subsidies on veterinary supplies, day-old chicks, and other supplies. Effective project BME carried out.

Improved operation of diagnostic and nutrition labs. Improved animal nutrition and feed quality control. Training in environmental monitoring and management. Conduct of economic and market analysis. Reformulated livestock industry legislation. Provision of technical and

Project BME system not implemented at desired level.

DLS and NGO delivery system strengthened in most upazilas.

Ten national NGOs participated and partnership between DLS and NGOs improved for services delivery. 132 personmonths (local) and 70 personmonths (expatriate consultancies) utilized. 1082 DLS/NGO staff trained on participatory approach/ extension and technical aspects and smallholder livestock production. Private sector and NGO participation in the production and delivery of day-old chicks and medicines increased. Prices of vaccines increased but phasing in of commercialization not initiated. Partial removal of subsidies on day-old chicks and fertile eggs introduced. BME on diagnostic/feed analysis laboratories introduced. Performed limited operations of diagnostic and feed analysis facilities.

98 DLS/NGO staff trained and 424 DLS/NGO staff participated in a 3-day monitoring workshop. Not addressed.

Not yet initiated.

DLS, PMU, NGO, PKSF reports, DLS PCR and Danida PCR.

Reliable information is available on a timely basis. Effective adoption of recommendations of the consultants and launch of training programs. Supervision by project staff and other DLS staff is adequate. There are additional NGOs wanting to participate in the Project. 130 personmonths financed by Danida, 6 personmonths under loan. Danida provided cofinancing. Willingness of DLS staff to participate and learn. Action plan for commercializationof veterinary vaccine production laboratory (VVPL) is implemented; other cost-recovery measures are implemented successfully. Government implements loan covenants.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Consultancy inputs are effective and sustained.

DLS procedures are effective. Equipment is supplied and modifications carried out effectively.

. • Staff effectively trained,

mobilized, and committed. Research may not be completed in time or may not yield useful results. Consultancies completed and recommendations implemented.

BME reports were available on time Recommendation of the consultants accepted but not adopted appropriately. Supervision by project and other DLS staff could not be regular due to stressed workload and limited movement facilities. Due to strict credit recovery regulations, activities remained limited within participating NGOs. Danida cofinanced fully and extended support for additional 6 months. DLS staff participated in the training programs. Price of vaccines in VVPL increased but effective measures for its commercialization were not initiated. Four poultry farms production managed at breakeven point and at some farms cost recovery measures are not up to the loan covenants level. Consultancy inputs not effectively utilized. DLS procurement was moderately smooth. Diagnostic and feed analysis laboratories are not performing at expected level due to a shortage of operational funds. Staff trained in sufficient numbers but showed limited commitment.

Appendix 1 21

Design Summary

Targets





financial advice to DLS and NGOs.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Improved equality in gender issues. Effective facilitation of farmer groups. In-country training of 300 project personnel. 45 personmonths ofinternational fellowshipsprovided to project personnel. • Investigatory studies completed (i) Nutrition and Health Constraints to Goat Production; (ii) Preservation and Treatment of Straw in the Wet Season; and (iii) Development of Protein Banks at Village Level. Recommendation and outputs of studies disseminated to implementing agencies.

Danida provided TA.

Awareness created on gender issues. 1,340 farmers groups established. In-country training for 1,082 NGO/DLS staff completed. 117 personmonths training of NGO/PMU/DLS staff in Denmark and in the Asian Institute of Technology in Bangkok on livestock and extension completed. Eight adoptive research projects completed but not very specific to targeted topics. However, Pertis Petil-du Ruminants (PPR) vaccine production research initiated. Due to late availability of research results, outputs could not be disseminated to beneficiaries.

Effective “Women in Development” consultancy.

Technical staff for the Project is appointed on a full-time basis. Commitment and capacity of staff trained in the participatory approach; cofinancing is provided by Danida; selection of appropriate personnel for training. Selection of suitable consultants who meet performance requirements; information used as a basis for more informed planning in sector; cofinancing is provided by Danida.

Research completed at the later stage of the Project and could not be used during project period. Consultancies completed but recommendations not appropriately utilized. “Women in development” consultancy input provided and recommendations partially implemented. Staff appointed fulltime but departed within two years. Staff trained on participatory approach showed limited commitment. Danida cofinanced; selection of DLS staff for training was not fully appropriate.

Consultants selected appropriately. Information used for sector planning; and Danida cofinanced.

4.0 Activities 4.1 Village livestock

systems: (a) Microcredit for

livestock enterprises.

(b) Support services.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

$19.95 million for microcredit packages for housing, equipment, chicks, and production inputs for poultry production.

$1.04 million for loan packages for livestock equipment and feed.

$7.97 million for transport, training materials, feed, input supplies, NGO salaries, operation and maintenance

$9.90 million disbursed as microcredit.

$0.94 million utilized for procurement of equipment and feed.

$2.4 million utilized for transport, training materials, NGO salaries, operating expenses, etc (Danida TA).

PKSF credit distribution report. NGO report, ADB project performance report.

DLS PCR.

DLS PCR.

Successful execution of the subsidiary loan agreement (Government-PKSF) and subloan agreements (PKSF- NGOs) is required. PKSF and the participating NGOs need to maintain their high recovery rates in microcredit operations. NGOs need to organize field programs effectively, and microcredit terms need to remain attractive to farmers.

Subsidiary and subloan agreements executed successfully. PKSF has established a revolving fund. Some NGOs have recycled credit funds while other NGOs failed to qualify for successive fund disbursements from PKSF.

Lower price of purchased items and reduced number of items yielded lower actual project cost.

Appendix 1

22

Design Summary

Targets





costs, travel and transportation cost of program organizers and training and development of staff.

4.2 Institutional capacity

building. (a) Upgrading of

thana livestock development centers.

(b) Other DLS

livestock facilities.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

$3.1 million.

$0.94 million for equipment for district veterinary hospitals, disease diagnostic labs, and feed analysis labs; and fodder seed.

$2.4 million utilized for upgrading 66 upazila livestock development centers.

$0.93 million utilized for equipping and furnishing 17 district veterinary hospitals including fodder seed.

DLS PCR.

DLS PCR.

Government finance available.

Equipment procured and installed, and service fees introduced.

Government fund was made available.

Equipment procured and installed but service fees not introduced.

4.3 Project management,

training, research, and consultancies.

•

• •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

$2.09 million for transport, office equipment, salaries and vehicle operating cost.

$2.9 million. 66 person months of international consultants’ services.

70 personmonths of international consultants’ services.

Vehicles and office equipment.

Regional fellowships.

In-country fellowships.

$1.84 million utilized.

69 personmonths of international consultants used.

132 months domestic consultants used.

$0.33 million utilized.

37 persons completed 6-week regional training programs at Thailand.

75 attended 2- to 4.5- month each training programs in Denmark.

In-country fellowships merged with regional fellowships.

DLS PCR.

Danida PCR.

Danida PCR.

Danida PCR and DLS PCR.



Danida report.

Government budget funds are available.

Danida cofinancing

Danida cofinancing.

Suitable trainees available for in-country and overseas fellowships.

Government funds were made available.

Danida cofinancing was timely and utilized.

Danida cofinancing was timely and utilized.

Trainees were made available for in-country and overseas fellowships. In some cases selection was not appropriate.

Appendix 1 23

Design Summary

Targets





•

•

•

• •

•

Applied review and research studies.

Recurrent costs for operating costs, domestic travel and training’

8 applied research items completed and $0.12 million (Tk7.30 million) utilized. PMU utilized allotted fund. $1.4 million used.

Danida made funds available in early 2000 and results were available in mid 2003. Required fund was available.

4.4 Consulting services

for microfinance.

• • • • • $0.14 million for 6

personmonths of consultant (microfinance) for project supervision.

Microcredit specialist completed assignment.

Project progress report.

Consultant appointed.

Consultant appointed and submitted report. However, the PMU did not appreciate performance of the consultant.

Appendix 2 24

PROJECT UPAZILAS1 ALLOTTED TO NGOs

NGOs District Upazila Nos. BRAC Dinajpur Bochaganj, Chirirbandar, Khansama, Parbatipur 4 Jamalpur Dewangonj, Jamalpur Sadar, Madarganj, Sarishabari 4 Kurigram Bhurungamari, Char Rajibpur, Nageswari, Phulbari, Raumari 5 Lalmonirhat Hatibandha, Kaliganj, Lalmonirhat Sadar 3 Naogaon Atrai, Sapahar 2 Netrokona Durgapur 1 Nilphamari Dimla, Jaldhaka 2 Panchagar Boda, Debiganj, Tetulia 3 Rangpur Gangachara, Pirgacha, Rangpur Sadar 3 Sirajganj Belkuchi, Chauhali, Rajganj 3 Thakurgaon Haripur 1 Subtotal 31 Proshika Chapai

Nawabganj Bholahat, Gomastapur, Nachole, Nawabganj Sadar, Shibganj 5

Dinajpur Birol, Hakimpur, Kaharol 3 Gaibandha Fulchari 1 Jamalpur Bakshiganj, Islampur, Melandaha 3 Kurigram Chilmari, Ulipur 2 Lalmonirhat Aditmari, Patgram 2 Mymensingh Muktagacha 1 Naogaon Mohadevpur, Naogaon Sadar 2 Netrakona Atpara, Kalmakanda, 2 Nilphamari Nilphamari Sadar, Saidpur 2 Sherpur Jhenaigati 1 Sirajganj Kamarkhanda , Kazipur, Sirajganj Sadar 3 Subtotal 28 TMSS Bogra Sariakandi, Dhunut, Sherpur 3 Gaibandha Shaghatta 1 Naogaon Badalgachi, Manda, Neyamatpur, Porsha 4 Subtotal 8 Swanirvar Bangladesh

Gaibandha Gaibandha Sadar, Palashbari, Sadullapur, Sundarganj 4

RDRS Kurigram Kurigram Sadar, Rajarhat 2 Nilphamari Kishoreganj 1 Subtotal 3 HEED Bangladesh

Dinajpur Ghoraghat 1

Gaibandha Gobindaganj 1 Joypurhat Panchbibi 1 Subtotal 3 ESDO Thakurgaon Baliadangi, Pirganj, Ranishankali 3 GKF Rangpur Badarganj, Mithapukur, Taraganj 3 POPI Netrokona Barhatta, Madan, Mohanganj 3 UDPS Dinajpur Dinajpur Sadar, Nawabganj, Phulbari 3

Total

89

NGO = nongovernment organization, Nos. = numbers, BRAC = Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, ESDO = Eco-Social Development Organization, GKF = Grameen Krishi Foundation, HEED = Health, Education, and Economic Development, POPI = People’s Oriented Program Implementation, RDRS = Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services, TMSS = Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha, and UDPS = Uttara Development Program Society. Source: PKSF. 2001.

1 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana.

Appendix 3 25

MICROCREDIT DISBURSEMENT AND RECOVERY

BRAC = Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, ESDO = Eco-social Development Organization, GKF = Grameen Krishi Foundation, HEED = Health, Education, and Economic Development, NGO = nongovernment organization, PKSF = Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation, POPI = People’s Oriented Program Implementation, RDRS = Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services, TMSS = Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha, and UDPS = Uttara Development Program Society.

Table A3.1: NGO-wise Microcredit Disbursement and Recovery by PKSF

(million taka) Cumulative

Recoverable Cumulative Recovered

Cumulative Overdue Item

Cumulative Loan

Disburse-ment Principal Service

Charge Principal Service Charge

Outstand- ing

Amount Principal

Service Charge

Recovery Percentage

BRAC 292.00 194.20 25.81 194.20 25.81 97.80 0.00 0.00 100 ESDO 34.70 15.71 2.47 15.71 2.47 18.99 0.00 0.00 100 GKF 9.90 9.60 1.15 8.55 1.11 1.35 1.05 0.04 89 HEED 8.52 8.52 1.00 8.52 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 POPI 19.00 7.90 1.10 7.90 1.10 11.10 0.00 0.00 100 Proshika 55.00 55.00 6.45 55.00 6.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 RDRS 5.60 5.60 0.66 5.60 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 Swanirvar 25.77 19.06 2.56 18.75 2.55 7.03 0.30 0.01 98 TMSS 119.52 70.51 9.37 70.51 9.37 49.00 0.00 0.00 100 UDPS 23.90 10.05 1.53 10.05 1.53 13.85 0.00 0.00 100 Total 593.91 396.15 52.10 394.79 52.05 199.12 1.35 0.05 99

Source: PKSF Report, June 2003.

Table A3.2: Beneficiary-wise Distribution and Recovery of Microcredit by NGOs

Disbursed Amount (million taka)

Recoverable Amount (million taka)

Recovered Amount (million taka)

Recovery Percentage

Name of NGOs Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total BRAC 0.0 1,067.9 1,067.9 0.0 895.5 895.5 0.0 893.6 893.6 0.0 99.8 99.8 ESDO 6.0 106.2 112.2 0.0 88.5 88.5 0.0 87.4 87.4 0.0 98.8 98.8 GKF 0.0 43.8 43.8 0.0 42.4 42.4 0.0 34.5 34.5 0.0 81.4 81.4 HEED 0.0 43.2 43.2 0.0 39.8 39.8 0.0 37.2 37.2 0.0 93.5 93.5 POPI 0.3 50.2 50.5 1.1 42.4 43.5 0.2 40.6 40.8 18.2 95.8 93.8 Proshika 53.8 366.6 420.4 0.0 382.7 382.7 0.0 302.0 302.0 0.0 78.9 78.9 RDRS 0.0 36.3 36.3 0.0 36.4 36.4 0.0 21.0 21.0 0.0 57.7 57.7 Swanirvar 1.6 88.4 90.0 1.1 83.4 84.5 0.9 76.1 77.0 81.8 91.2 91.1 TMSS 0.0 213.5 213.5 0.0 165.0 165.0 0.0 163.4 163.4 0.0 99.0 99.0 UDPS 0.8 59.2 60.0 0.8 49.6 50.4 0.7 48.4 49.1 87.5 97.6 97.4 Total 62.5

(2.9%) 2,075.3 (97.1%)

2,137.8 3.0 1,825.7 1,828.7 1.8 1,704.2 1,706.0 60.0 93.3 93.3

BRAC = Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, ESDO = Eco-social Development Organization, GKF = Grameen Krishi Foundation, HEED = Health, Education and Economic Development, NGO = nongovernment organization, PKSF = Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation, POPI = People’s Oriented Program Implementation, RDRS = Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services, TMSS = Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Shangha, and UDPS = Uttara Development Program Society. Source: PKSF, June 2003.

Appendix 4 26

ENTERPRISE TARGET AND ACHIEVEMENT AS OF 30 JUNE 2003

Table A4: Achievement Against Target by Enterprise

Number of Beneficiaries Enterprises Target AchievementAchievement Percentage

Beef fattener 4,005 3,988 100 Chick rearer 3,560 3,227 91 Egg seller 890 870 98 Feed seller 890 849 95 Key rearer 342,917 315,825 92 Mini hatchery 534 289 54 Model breeder 2,314 1,707 74 Poultry worker 8,900 8,475 95

Total 364,010a 335,230 92 a To maintain ratio between different enterprises of poultry model production chain, target numbers were slightly modified. Source: Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation Report, 2003.

Figure A4: Microcredit Disbursement among Beneficiaries by NGOs:

Target and Achievement

BRAC = Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, ESDO = Eco-social Development Organization, GKF = Grameen Krishi Foundation, HEED = Health, Education and Economic Development, NGO = nongovernment organization, POPI = People’s Oriented Program Implementation, RDRS = Rangpur Dinajpur Rural Services, TMSS = Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Shangha, and UDPS = Uttara Development Program Society. Source: Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation Report, 2003.

Appendix 5 27

DETAILED ACTUAL COST AGAINST APPRAISAL BY EXPENDITURE CATEGORY

(in million taka) Cost of Appraisal Actual Cost

Sl. Expenditure Head Local Currency

Foreign Exchange Total Local

Currency Foreign

Exchange Total Source of

Fund

01. Construction 132.00 0.00 132.00 131.11 0.0 131.11 Government

Total Cost 132.00 0.00 132.00 131.11 0.0 131.11

8.90 0.00 8.90 0.00 8.71 8.71 Government 1.00 1.60 2.60 0.56 2.00 2.56 ADB 7.40 35.70 43.10 0.00 40.00 40.00 ADB

Equipment and Furniture a) Equipment b) Furniture c) Laboratory expenditure d) Fodder seeds 0.60 2.60 3.20 0.60 2.60 3.20 ADB

02.

Total Cost 17.90 39.90 57.80 54.46 2.60 54.46

743.04 43.04 786.10 528.15 0.00 528.15 ADB Microcredit 69.13 69.13 PKSF

03.

Total Cost 812.20 43.04 855.20 497.56 30.60 528.15

99.72 0.00 99.72 96.40 0.00 96.40 Danida 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.41 ADB

Training a) Farmers Training b) Miscellaneous Training c) Training for government personnel

0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 Government

04.

Total Cost 100.63 0.00 100.63 96.80 0.0 96.80

2.40 0.00 2.43 0.00 2.43 2.43 ADB

10.71 10.71 0.00 10.71 10.71 ADB 8.27 0.00 8.27 0.00 4.27 4.27 ADB

Transport a) 2 Jeeps b) 17 Pickups c) 92 Motorcycles d) 1 Jeep and 1 Pickup 3.46 3.46 0.00 3.46 3.46 Danida

05.

Total Cost 10.70 14.20 24.90 6.70 14.20 20.90

06. Manpower 5.80 0.00 5.80 5.45 0.00 5.45 Government

26.32 0.00 26.32 26.31 0.00 23.61 Government

Other Support Services a) Feed Additives b) OCC 55.67 0.00 55.67 55.77 0.00 55.77 Government

07.

Total Cost 82.00 0.00 82.00 82.10 0.00 82.10 Government

08. CD VAT 17.60 0.00 17.60 16.84 0.00 16.84 Government

17.52 65.00 82.50 28.73 65.00 93.71 Danida 2.00 1.00 3.00 1.36 0.68 2.03 ADB 0.00 61.34 61.34 0.00 69.96 69.96 Danida

14.74 14.40 29.13 2.00 14.44 16.40 Danida

10.53 10.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADB 49.28 18.44 67.78 0.00 17.16 0.00 Danida 0.00 23.77 23.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADB

09. TA Applied Research and Training a) Consultant (long-term) b) Consultant (short-term) c) Applied-research, training and fellowship d) Office operational cost and equipment e) Unallocated contingency f) Service charge g) Price escalation 3.07 5.57 8.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 Danida

Total: (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9)

1,234.53 285.10 1,519.63 923.50 194.77 1,117.82

Sl.= serial, ADB. = Asian Development Bank, CD VAT = customs duties and value added taxes, Danida = Danish International Development Assistance, Government = Government of Bangladesh, OCC = other contingency charges, PKSF = Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation. Source: Department of Livestock Services 2003. Project Completion Report

Appendix 6 28

SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL PROGRESS Sl. Items Unit Appraisal Actual

A. Procurement of Transport

1. Jeep number 3 3 2. Pick-up number 18 18 3. Motorcycle number 132 92a

B. Procurement of Equipment and Furniture

4. Equipment for 17 DVHs i) Laboratory table number 85 85 ii) Work table number 17 17 iii) Freeze table number 34 34 iv) Table rack number 17 17 v) Floor rack number 17 17 vi) Half secretariat table number 17 17 vii) Revolving chair number 51 51 viii) Sink basin number 17 17 ix) Fume hood number 17 17 x) Equipment cabinet number 17 17 xi) Cane number 17 17 xii) Laboratory tool number 34 34 xiii) Computer number 22 22 xiv) Photocopier number 02 02 xv) Printer number 22 22 xvi) Multimedia number 01 01 xvii) Video camera number 01 01

5. Furniture for 17 DVHs and 66 ULDCs

i) Full secretariat table number 132 132 ii) Typing table, dispensing table number 264 264 iii) Rack number 264 264 iv) Wooden and steel almirah number 264 264 v) Armed cushion chair number 132 132 vi) Armed and armless chair number 192 192 vii) Peon tool and bench number 198 198

6. Procurement of improved seeds

ton

360

360

C. Construction and Civil Work

7. Construction of ULDCs number 66 66

DVH = district veterinary hospital; SI. = serial; ULDC = upazila livestock development centre a Forty motorcycles could not be procured due to non-approval of Ministry of Finance. Source: Department of Livestock Services 2003. PCR.

Appendix 7 29

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENT BY DANIDA

Technical Assistance Completion Report1

TA No. Country and Name Amount approved: $11.2 million TA 104-BAN. 805-8 (Danida) Participatory Livestock Revised amount: $11.2 million Development Project Executing Agency: Department of Livestock Services

Source of Funding: Danish International Development Assistance

TA Amount Undisbursed: $1.166 million

TA Amount Utilized: $10.034 million

Date Approved

Date of TA Signing

Fielding of Consultants

TA Completion Date: Original

Actual

17 Jan 1997 25 Jul 1997 28 Feb 1998 30 Jun 2003 31 Dec 2003

Description:

The technical assistance (TA) component was attached to Loan 1524-BAN(SF): Participatory Livestock Development Project approved on 19 June 1997. Danida administered the TA in parallel with the loan component financed by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

The objective of the TA was to train the staff of the Department of Livestock Services (DLS) to implement, monitor, and supervise field activities using the participatory approach. The TA support included (i) providing consultancy services for gender sensitization, (ii) adopting improved feed technologies and disease diagnosis and monitoring; and (iii) preparing legal frameworks for compliance by nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and beneficiaries. Output Evaluation

The chief technical adviser or the senior adviser, international, and domestic consultants trained staff of the project management unit (PMU) within DLS, and NGOs on (i) using the participatory approach, (ii) developing training modules, (iii) producing an annual work plan, and (iv) applying the “extension” methodology.

The following specialist’s inputs activities were provided:

(i) Women in development specialists. Addressed gender sensitization, conducted women empowerment activities, and developed plans for gender mainstreaming.

(ii) Feed specialist. Completed inputs and assisted PMU in coordinating its efforts with other relevant projects.

(iii) Environmental specialist. Completed inputs and produced comprehensive reports for implementation by DLS.

(iv) Legal specialist. Prepared the legal frameworks for compliance by NGOs and beneficiaries.

(v) Veterinary disease specialist. Initiated diagnosis and epidemiological study of, and developed control manual for poultry diseases.

(vi) Economist and monitoring and evaluation specialist. Provided data collection methodology and tools for monitoring and evaluation. aspects.

(vii) National livestock specialist and training specialists. Organized training of NGO/DLS staff and monitored training of beneficiaries at area offices of the partner NGOs (Table A7.1).

------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Prepared by Arun Kumar Saha, Project Implementation Officer, BRM

Appendix 7 30

Resource personnel from PMU, Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), DLS, and NGOs trained 577 NGO area officers, upazila2 livestock officers (ULOs) and other managerial staff on livestock and/or poultry development, and extension and project management. Another 117 NGO coordinators and ULOs received 4.5–6 months’ training from the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand, and King’s Veterinary College (KVL), Denmark, on livestock development and extension methodologies. The training improved the knowledge and skills of DLS and NGO staff in motivating beneficiaries, organizing and monitoring project facilities, and designing and implementing livestock and poultry projects (Table A7.1). However, DLS and NGOs failed to retain these trained staff, as they were transferred to other positions within 2 years of project implementation. DLS staff were also recommended for training not related to the project activities.

A total of 428 staff, composed of technical officers, area managers, program organizers (POs), and program assistants (PAs) of partner NGOs, DLS staff, and PMU specialists, attended a seven-day training-of-trainers course conducted in several batches. However, POs and PAs developed very limited skills because of (i) their lack of an academic background, and (ii) the absence of a prescribed manual.

A total of 405,965 beneficiaries were trained on poultry-rearing practices, especially on the principles of semi-scavenging systems, the benefits of using day/night shelters, basket brooders, and routine vaccination against highly infectious diseases. About 2,130 poultry workers were also trained on cold-chain maintenance of vaccines, vaccination, and primary treatment against common poultry diseases (Table A7.2). NGO technical officers, POs and PAs conducted the training. ULOs were rarely involved as trainers. Beneficiary training was not very effective, because most beneficiaries failed to adopt the technologies introduced through the theoretical training.

Fifteen scientists, teachers, and officers from DLS research institutes, ULDCs, and Chittagong Government College obtained their master of science (MSc) degrees from King’s Veterinary College (KVL), Denmark. The MSc research work included feeding strategies, egg production of different poultry breeds, genetic susceptibility to infectious bursal disease, and epidemiological studies pertaining to poultry (Table A7.2). Knowledge acquired by these graduates helped DLS to effectively teach feed analysis, feed formulation, and diagnostic services. These were not of any immediate benefit to the Project but will have latent effect on smallholders of livestock and poultry production.

The TA funded seven research projects relevant to semi-scavenging poultry production amounting to Tk7.30 million. Research projects developed effective vaccines against fowl pox and fowl cholera and least cost feed ingredients for semi-scavenging poultry by incorporating protein and vitamins supplement from local resources. Another comparative study established the superiority of Sonali3 (Fayoumi X RIR) over hilly birds crossed with either Fayoumi or Rhode Island Red as regards production and hatchability of eggs. The susceptibility of poultry in project areas to salmonellosis, collibacillosisres, fowl cholera, and aspergillosis was recorded. A surveillance model was developed and recommended for application. Another study recorded that helminth infestations with several nematodes, cestodes and trematodes was higher in aged birds than in chicks under the semi-scavenging rearing system. There were no seasonal effects. Both calcium and phosphorus recorded a positive correlation with cestode infestations but a negative correlation with nematodes. However, both calcium and metabilieable energy had negative relationship with nematode and cestodes. An agribusiness study of poultry enterprises using cost and return analysis showed that all the components of the poultry model production chain (PMPC) were profitable. All research had been completed by mid-2002 but findings could not be applied because of the belated availability of evaluated results. The list of completed research items is presented in Table A7.3.

The beneficiary participation plan prepared under the TA was implemented efficiently, and the TA consultants fulfilled all the reporting requirements. Ten NGOs supported by PMU established (i) area offices, and (ii) 1,340 village organizations (VOs) with 20–35 members each. The TA trained 405,964 beneficiaries on (i) the technical aspects of poultry rearing and beef fattening, (ii) group mobilization, and (iii) the proper use of, and responsibilities involved in microcredit. The TA supported the preparation of regulatory frameworks for compliance by the NGOs and beneficiaries.

2 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana. 3 A hybrid developed from crossing Fayomi with Rhode Island Red.

Appendix 7 31

The beneficiaries did not fully accept the rigid recommendations of the PMPC. They modified the technologies and flock sizes according to their needs and suitability but retained the basic objective of improved feeding and disease control practices. Within the initial 2 years, the TA consultants reviewed the PMPC performance in low-lying areas such as Atpara, Durgapur, Madan and Mohangonj, where PMPC was not viable, and suggested the introduction of ducks instead of fowls. The beneficiaries accepted the suggestion and the TA consultants facilitated the implementation of project activities adequately. Overall Assessment and Rating

The inputs specified in the consultants’ terms of reference were sufficient to provide the required services (Table A7.4). The TA inputs in the original plan were 60 person months for international consultants and 70 person months for domestic consultants. However, Danida, with a view to making proper use of its TA funds, extended the total person months to 77.27 for international consultants and 137.41 person months for domestic consultants. At completion, 69.16 person months of international and 132.16 person months of domestic consultancy were used. The increase in the person months of local consultants, especially of the national livestock specialist’s, was necessary to further develop the demand-driven supply and services system of the poultry model so that the beneficiaries could overcome problems identified during the original project period. During the extended period, 32 poultry workers (PW) were further trained on primary treatment of birds, vaccination of goats, feed formulations, and developed as community livestock extension workers (CLEWs). Some of these CLEWs are performing well and are providing services to different groups of farmers on a self-employed basis. ADB engaged one microcredit specialist for 6 months, whose performance was not appreciated by the PMU.

The TA design was relevant in terms of its objectives. Relevant priority areas for activities were identified, and appropriate processes and procedures to assist DLS and PMU were specified. The consultants’ performance was rated as satisfactory. The required outputs were produced on time but were not duly implemented by DLS, PMU, and NGOs. Beneficiary participation in PMPC was adequate but some enterprises were better off as independent establishments.

The consultants introduced changes in DLS and NGO staff’s attitude to service delivery to rural farmers. The consultants also introduced a management concept for DLS and NGOs, enabling staff to (i) maintain the facilities created under the loan, and (ii) coordinate the use of facilities for improved livestock and poultry rearing to serve the rural poor. The Government of Bangladesh, including the DLS PMU, was satisfied with the TA inputs. ADB review missions provided timely, relevant, and appropriate direction to the TA work. PMU provided the necessary administrative logistical support to the consultants. Considering all the relevant aspects, the TA was rated as moderately successful. Major Lessons Learned

Danida administered the TA in parallel with the ADB loan, which affected synchronization and close coordination of activities between PKSF, NGOs, DLS, and Danida to some extent.

VOs were effective mechanisms for wider beneficiary participation in the design and implementation of PMPC. The participatory approach and methodology developed under the TA helped rural women understand the benefits and problems of rearing semi-scavenging poultry. Measures to tackle the problems increased their access to inputs and required services.

DLS and NGOs did not adequately practice the recommendations of the consultants. DLS fund limitations affected the extent to which it could maintain the established facilities, while in many situations, NGOs used project-provided facilities for other nonlivestock and/or poultry activities. Recommendations and Follow up Action

The responsibilities of the Government of Bangladesh in maintaining the infrastructure facilities were clearly defined in the Loan Agreement (LA). In compliance with the LA, the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock should (i) allocate sufficient funds to DLS to maintain the facilities, (ii) generate funds for

Appendix 7 32

optimum operations, and (iii) change service rules to retain the trained personnel in the diagnostic laboratories. NGOs also need to expand pro-poor livestock and poultry activities to optimize the use of the facilities and trained personnel. Loan and TA funds should be administered by a single entity for better coordination and synchronization of Project activities.

Table A7.1: Summary of Training Programs Organized under the Project

Category of Number of Participants

Type of Training Duration Participants Female Male Total A. Beneficiary Training 1. General technical training 3 days Group

members 360,609 45,358 405,964

2. Poultry workers training 6 days Group members

2,109 21 2,130

B. Staff Training Local 1. Training of trainers 5 days

DLS and partner NGO officials

39

488 527

2. Technical training on livestock development and extension

5 days TC of partner NGOs

0 14 14

3. Gender and development 2 days DLS officials 3 95 98 4. Farm visit and field day 1 day DLS and

NGOs staff 29 98 127

5. Workshop on monitoring 3 days DLS and NGOs staff

60 385 445

6. Training on model breeding 4 days NGOs staff 9 10 19 7. Training on computer puter operation operation

10 days10 days DLS staff DLS staff 00 22 22 2222

8. Technical training on 8. Technical training on poultry and livestock poultry and livestock management management

3 days3 days POs/PAs of NGOs POs/PAs of NGOs

8686 380 380 429429

International International 1. Training on livestock/poultry 1. Training on livestock/poultry development technology at development technology at AIT, Thailand. AIT, Thailand.

4.5–6 months 4.5–6 months

DLS and NGO officials DLS and NGO officials

00

37 37 3737

2. Training on livestock/poultry 2. Training on livestock/poultry development technology in development technology in Denmark. Denmark.

4.5–6 months 4.5–6 months

MOFL and DLS officials MOFL and DLS officials

55 75 75 8080

3. MSc. program in KVL 3. MSc. program in KVL College, Denmark College, Denmark

15 months 15 months

DLS officials DLS officials 22 13 13 1515

AIT = Asian Institute of Technology, DLS = Department of Livestock Services, KVL = Kings Veterinary College, MSc = masters of science, MOFL = Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, NGO = nongovernment organization, PA = program assistant, PO = program organizer, TC = technical coordinator. Source: Project progress reports, 2003.

Appendix 7 33

Table A7.2: List of Research Items Undertaken under MSc Fellowship Program Sl. Title of Thesis Research Program 1

Feeding strategies and the effect on the production on model breeding and chick rearing units under Participatory Livestock Development Project (PLDP).

2

Egg production of different poultry breeds in scavenging systems under PLDP.

3

Prevalence among genetic susceptibility of different breeds to infectious bursal disease (IBD).

4

Study on the effect of feed supplementation on the performance of Fayoumi and Sonali chicken under semi-scavenging condition in rural areas of Bangladesh.

5

Longitudinal study of the causes of mortality of chicken in different parent stock breeds of Department of Livestock Services (DLS) with special emphasis on the impact of Escherichia coli infections.

6

Prevalence and epidemiological study of Newcastle disease in rural poultry of Bangladesh (PLDP area).

7 Helminthosis of free-range poultry in Bangladesh.

8

The effects of Vitamin A on growth parameters and disease resistance in parent stock breeds of DLS.

9 Incubating capacity of broody hens and chick performance.

10

Variation of protein and energy intake under cafeteria feeding of scavenging hens during and after the harvest.

11

Study on feeding of duckweed as protein supplements for growth and production of ducks.

12 Profitability in production of day-old chicks for scavenging, semi-scavenging rural

chickens and some crossbreed by using broody hens electric incubator and home made rice husk incubator.

13 Investigation on the prevalence and significance of Mycoplasma gallisepticum in parent

stock layer chicken in Bangladesh.

14 Investigation on the co-relation between the detection of Salmonelia enterica in parent

stock flocks, hatcheries and during one week of chicks rearing with special emphasis on Salmonella Pullorum.

15 Investigation on hemagglutinatin inhibition titers under field condition related to

convention Newcastle disease vaccination program on DLS parent stock farms (PLDP area).

Source: Danida. 2003. PCR. Dhaka.

34 Appendix 7

Table A7.3. List of Completed Research Items Research Topics Amount

Allocated (Tk) Completion

Status Crossing deshi full feathered and hilly with Rhode Island Red and Fayoumi for development of layer chickens suitable for semi-scavenging system with Sonali as control.

1,100,920 Completed

Poultry farming under Participatory Livestock Development Project (PLDP) - An Agribusiness Study.

835,960 Completed

Impact of parasitic infestation on the nutritional aspects of poultry birds under semi-scavenging condition.

1,285,484 Completed

Development of least cost feed formula to improve the productivity of semi scavenging poultry birds (Emphasis should be given to develop protein and vitamin supplement from local resources).

1,143,400 Completed

Efficacy of experimentally developed pigeon pox and fowl cholera vaccines. 976,968 Completed

Development of PLDP area based surveillance system for epidemiological scenarios and qualification of semi-scavenger losses attributed to main endemic disease of poultry.

1,524,244 Completed

Comparative study on the performance of a 3-way crossbred chickens (Austra Sonali) with that of Sonali.

438,000 Completed

Total

7,304,976


Appendix 7 35

Table A7.4: Consultancy Input Utilization Status

Area Person months Allocated Utilized

International (long term)

Chief technical adviser 25.69 25.69

Senior adviser 12.00 12.00

International (short term)

WID specialist 9.00 9.00

M&E specialist 6.68 6.68

Economist 4.97 4.97 Veterinary disease specialist 3.00 1.89

Feed specialist 2.93 2.93

Fodder specialist 2.00 0.00

Legal specialist 4.00 4.00

Environment specialist 2.00 2.00

Subtotal 72.27 69.16

National

Livestock specialist 57.41 65.51 WID specialist 20.00 16.81

National consultant 60.00 58.84

Subtotal 137.41 132.16

Total 209.68 201.32 WID = Women in Development, M&E = Monitoring and Evaluation.


Appendix 8 36

STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOAN COVENANTS

Covenants Reference in

Loan Agreement

Status of Compliance

The Borrower shall cause the Project to be carried out with due diligence and efficiency and in conformity with sound administrative, financial, engineering, environmental, microcredit, livestock development, veterinary and business practices.

Section 4.01 (a) Complied with.

In the carrying out of the Project and operation of the Project facilities, the Borrower shall perform, or cause to be performed, all obligations set forth in Schedule 6 to this Loan Agreement.

Section 4.01 (b) Complied with.

The Borrower shall make available, promptly as needed, the funds, facilities, services, land and other resources which are required, in addition to the proceeds of the Loan, for the carrying out of the Project and for the operation and maintenance of the Project facilities.

Section 4.02 Complied with.

In the carrying out of the Project, the Borrower shall cause competent and qualified consultants and contractors, acceptable to the Borrower and the Bank, to be employed to an extent and upon terms and conditions satisfactory to the Borrower and the Bank.


The Borrower shall cause the Project to be carried out in accordance with plans, design standards, specifications, work schedules and construction methods acceptable to the Borrower and the Bank. The Borrower shall furnish, or cause to be furnished, to the Bank, promptly after their preparation, such plans, design standards, specifications and work schedules, and any material modifications subsequently made therein, in such details as Bank shall reasonably request.


The Borrower shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, records and accounts adequate to identify the goods, services and other items of expenditure financed out of the proceeds of the Loan, to disclose the use thereof in the Project, to record the progress of the Project (including the cost thereof) and to reflect, in accordance with consistently maintained sound accounting principles, the operations and financial condition of the agencies of the Borrower responsible for the carrying out of the Project and operation of the Project facilities, or any part thereof.


The Borrower shall (i) cause Department of Livestock Services (DLS), Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation PKSF and each nongovernment


Appendix 8 37


Loan Agreement


organization (NGO) participating in the Project to maintain separate accounts for the Project; (ii) have such accounts and related financial statements audited annually, in accordance with appropriate auditing standards consistently applied, by independent auditors whose qualifications, experience and terms of reference are acceptable to the Bank; (iii) in the case of DLS and PKSF, furnish to the Bank, as soon as available but in any event not later than twelve months after the end of each related fiscal year, certified copies of such audited accounts and financial statements and the report of the auditors relating thereto (including the auditors’ opinion on the use of the Loan proceeds and compliance with the covenants of this Loan Agreement as well as on the use of the procedures for imprest accounts and the statements of expenditures issued under the Project), all in the English language; and (iv) furnish to the Bank such other information concerning such accounts and financial statements and the audit thereof as the Bank shall from time to time reasonably request. The Borrower shall enable the Bank and cause DLS and PKSF to enable the Bank, upon the Bank’s request, to discuss their respective financial statements for the Project and their respective financial affairs related to the Project from time to time with their respective auditors, and shall authorize and require any representative of such auditors to participate in any such discussions requested by the Bank, provided that any such discussion shall be conducted only in the presence of an authorized officer of the Borrower (and as appropriate, PKSF) unless the Borrower (and as appropriate, PKSF) may otherwise agree.

Section 4.06 (c) Complied with.

The Borrower shall furnish, or cause to be furnished, to the Bank all such reports and information as the Bank shall reasonably request concerning (i) the Loan, and the expenditure of the proceeds and maintenance of the service thereof; (ii) the goods, services and other items of expenditure financed out of the proceeds of the Loan; (iii) the Project; (iv) the Beneficiaries and the Subloans; (v) the administration, operations and financial condition of DLS, PKSF, the NGOs participating in the Project and any other agencies of the Borrower responsible for the carrying out of the


Appendix 8 38


Loan Agreement


Project and operation of the Project facilities, or any part thereof; (vi) financial and economic conditions in the territory of the Borrower and the international balance-of-payments position of the Borrower; and (vii) any other matters relating to the purposes of the Loan. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Borrower shall cause DLS and PKSF to furnish to the Bank semiannual reports on the carrying out of the Project and on the operation and management of the Project facilities. Such reports shall be submitted in such form and in such detail and within such a period as the Bank shall reasonably request, and shall indicate, among other things, progress made and problems encountered during the period under review, steps taken or proposed to be taken to remedy these problems, and proposed program of activities and expected progress during the following period. The Borrower shall cause DLS and PKSF to include in each second semiannual report the cumulative progress for the year covered by such report.


Promptly after physical completion of the Project, but in any event not later than three months thereafter or such later date as may be agreed for this purpose between the Borrower and the Bank, the Borrower shall cause DLS to coordinate with PKSF and shall prepare and furnish to the Bank a report, in such form and in such detail as the Bank shall reasonably request, on the execution and initial operation of the Project, including its cost, the performance by the Borrower of its obligations under the Loan Agreement and the accomplishment of the purposes of the Loan.

Section 4.07 (c) Complied with.

Imprest Accounts; Statement of Expenditures: Except as the Bank may otherwise agree, the Borrower shall establish immediately after the Effective Date, two imprest accounts in Bangladesh Bank or in a commercial bank acceptable to Bangladesh Bank and the Bank. One imprest account shall be for PKSF, and one imprest account shall be for DLS, for the purpose of releasing funds to assist DLS and PKSF in carrying out their respective components financed under the Loan. Each imprest account shall be established, managed, replenished and liquidated in accordance with the Bank’s “Loan Disbursement Handbook” dated June 1996, as

Schedule 3. Para 8 (a)

Complied with.

Appendix 8 39


Loan Agreement


amended from time to time, and detailed arrangements agreed upon between the Borrower and the Bank. The initial amount to be deposited into each imprest account shall be the equivalent of a four-month estimated expenditure or another sum agreed upon between the Borrower and the Bank. The statement of expenditures (SOE) procedure may be used for reimbursement of eligible expenditures for the Project and to liquidate advances provided into each imprest account, in accordance with the Bank’s “Loan Disbursement Handbook” dated June 1996, as amended from time to time, and detailed arrangements agreed upon between the Borrower and the Bank. Any individual contract to be reimbursed or liquidated under the SOE procedure shall not exceed the equivalent of $50,000.

Schedule 3. Para 8 (b)

Complied with.

DLS shall be responsible for carrying out the day-to-day supervision and monitoring of Project activities.

Schedule 6.1 Complied with by DLS as routine works.

PKSF shall be the implementing agency for Part A (i) of the Project. PKSF shall coordinate with DLS and the concerned NGOs in the Project area.

Schedule 6.2 Complied with by PKSF in Coordination with DLS.

Within one month after the effective date, the borrower shall establish a Project Steering Committee (PSC) in Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock (MOFL) to provide policy advice and guidance to ensure effective Project implementation. The PSC shall be chaired by the Secretary, MOFL; and the other members of the PSC shall include representatives from the Ministry of Finance (MOF), the Planning Commission, the Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division of the Ministry of Panning, the Association of Development Agencies in Bangladesh (ADAB), the NGO Affairs Bureau of the Prime Minister’s Office, DLS, PKSF and the NGOs participating in the Project.

Schedule 6.3

PSC established and was functioning and the meeting of the committee held as and when necessary.

DLS shall ensure that the full-time project director appointed under the Project heads and the Project Management Unit (PMU).

Schedule 6.4 Complied with.

Appendix 8 40


Loan Agreement


Within one month after the effective date, DLS shall establish a Project Coordination Committee (PCC) to provide technical and management guidance to the Project. The PCC shall be headed by the Director General of DLS; and the other members of the PCC shall include representatives from DLS, PKSF, and the NGOs participating in the Project. The PCC shall meet at least on a quarterly basis. The Project Director shall be the ex-officio Secretary of the PCC.

Schedule 6.5

PCC was established as required comprising the prescribed personnel. The committee met to provide technical and management guidance to the Project as and when necessary.

DLS shall establish prior to the effective date a PMU in Rangpur to manage, implement, and supervise the Project. The PMU shall be headed by the Project Director and shall be provided with adequate staff and logistic support. The PMU shall be assisted by the consultants to be provided under the Project. The PMU shall collaborate with PKSF and participating NGOs, and shall be responsible for the following activities: (i) select DLS, NGO and PKSF staff to receive training under the Project; (ii) award contracts for applied research studies provided under the Project; (iii) establish a group of peer reviewers to assess the output of these studies, and disseminate the outputs to agencies involved in the Project; (iv) ensure the participation of DLS staff in carrying out Project activities; (v) establish a management information system; and (vi) carry out benefit monitoring and evaluation (BME) activities under the Project.

Schedule 6.6

The PMU was established at Rangpur and consultants were fielded. Responsibilities assigned to PMU were carried out satisfactorily.

DLS shall ensure that the Project Liaison Unit (PLU) established within its headquarters in Dhaka acts as a link to coordinate Project activities between the PMU in Rangpur and DLS at its headquarters. DLS shall ensure that the PLU is headed by a senior-level DLS staff member and that the PLU is provided with adequate staff and logistic support.

Schedule 6.7 The PLU was established at DLS headquarters, Dhaka and a deputy director level officer was appointed with necessary staff and logistical support. The PLU coordinated with the project office, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, DLS, and ADB. The PLU organized PCC meeting and performed follow-up activities.

DLS shall establish a Thana1 Coordination Committee (TCC) in each Thana in accordance with the expansion of Project activities and in cooperation with participating NGOs. The TCC shall be headed by the Thana Livestock Officer, and its other members shall include one

Schedule 6.8 TCC was established in each Project thana in accordance with the covenant of the Loan Agreement and met on need basis to monitor implementation of Project activities.

1 Lowest administrative unit next to district, previously known as thana and now upazila.

Appendix 8 41


Loan Agreement


representative of each participating NGO involved in the Project, and two female representatives and one male representative from beneficiary groups. The TCC shall facilitate local level implementation of Project activities. The TCC shall meet at least once on a monthly basis.

The Borrower shall cause PKSF to designate, within one month after the Effective Data, a full-time Project Supervisor (Credit) with qualifications and experience acceptable to the Bank to oversee the implementation of Part A (i) of the Project. The Borrower shall also cause PKSF to provide an adequate number of suitably qualified professional and support staff to assist the Project Supervisor (Credit) to carry out the implementation of Part A (i) of the Project. The Borrower shall also cause PKSF to provide a full-time staff member to be based at the PMU to monitor its subloans to POs2.

Schedule 6.9 PKSF appointed a Project Supervisor (Credit) and DLS (PMU) provided logistic support to PKSF as stipulated.

A comprehensive midterm review (MTR) on all aspects of the Project shall be carried out by the Borrower, the Bank and any cofinancing agency involved in the Project in the third year of Project implementation, or at any other time as may be agreed upon by the parties. The results of the MTR shall be discussed by the parties, and appropriate corrective measures shall be formulated by the parties to ensure successful Project implementation and achievement of the Project objectives.

Schedule 6.10 A midterm review was conducted in November 2000. Results were discussed with parties concerned and an action plan drawn up for successful completion of the Project.

Annual reviews on all aspects of the Project shall be carried out by the Borrower, the Bank and any cofinancing agency involved in the Project in each year of Project implementation to assess the progress and status of Project implementation, and to identify any problems in Project implementation.

Schedule 6.11 First annual review mission was fielded in December 1998 and subsequently ADB conducted annual reviews involving Borrower and cofinancing agency.

Within six months after the Effective Date, the Borrower shall reach agreement with the NGOs participating in the Project on the coverage of Area Offices (AOs) to be set up or expanded by the NGOs under the Project. The Borrower shall cause each PO to provide its AO established within the Project area during and after Project implementation with (i) adequate staff, including an Area Manager and two Program Organizers (technical and credit); and (ii) adequate logistic support in order to ensure that the AO is able to

Schedule 6.12

Agreement signed with 10 NGOs to establish 60 area offices with staff and logistic support during fourth quarter of 1998. Established NGOs provided training to beneficiaries through the 60 established area offices. However, some NGOs reduced their supports to beneficiaries after Project completion.

2 Partner Organizations are the partner NGOs.

Appendix 8 42


Loan Agreement


provide the participating farmers with support for at least one of the following activities: poultry rearing, cattle fattening, and goat rearing.

DLS, at the thana level, shall provide training for NGOs and beneficiaries and supporting activities and advice on animal health in poultry rearing, cattle fattening and goat rearing activities provided under the Project. DLS shall also monitor Project activities, supply day-old chicks, and provide animal health services (including disease diagnosis and treatment), animal feed quality analysis, vaccine supplies, training and supporting advice on other related livestock development matters in poultry production, cattle fattening, and goat rearing activities to farmers in the Project area.

Schedule 6.13 Complied with by DLS field staff.

Within six months after the Effective Date, the PMU shall submit to the Bank for its concurrence a training program and a fellowship program for DLS, PKSF, and NGO staff provided under the Project and to be financed by a cofinancing agency. The programs shall include details on the fellowships and training to be provided and implementation schedules. The PMU shall provide the Bank with an update on the progress of these programs every six months thereafter during the Project implementation period.


Within six months after the Effective Date, the PMU shall submit to the Bank for its approval a program to be financed under the Loan for selected DLS staff for training in computerization and monitoring of the Project activities.


Appendix 8 43


Loan Agreement


Within a six month after the Effective Date, DLS shall prepare, with the assistance of the consultants provided under the Project, a monitoring and evaluation program for the Project in order to assess the pace of Project implementation. The program shall be in accordance with a management information system to be introduced by DLS by 30 September 1997, or by any other time as may be agreed upon by the Bank. DLS shall ensure that the program is included in the semiannual reports referred to in Section 4.07 (b) of this Loan Agreement. The program shall summarize the key indicators of the status of the Project, including the number of the Project participants. Subloans and repayments, group savings, financial performance indicators of the AOs established by the NGOs participating in the Project prices and incomes received, the number to persons employed and utilization of funds used for the Project, problems encountered and ways to address these problems. The benchmark for monitoring and evaluation shall be initial socioeconomic surveys of Project beneficiaries carried out by the NGOs participation in the Project with the assistance of the consultants provided under the Project. The monitoring system shall also integrate the ongoing monitoring and evaluation system in DLS, and the existing monitoring and evaluation systems used by PKSF and the NGOs participating in the Project.

Schedule 6.16

Base line survey conducted by Danida and all NGOs. Monitoring and evaluation program prepared and implemented through various reports including progress reports although proper management information system was not in place. Semi-annual reports provided the information as required in the Loan Agreement.

The Borrower shall ensure that adequate budgetary allocations are made for the Project to provide for the required amounts of funds, in addition to the Loan proceeds and any cofinancing funds provided under the Project, for the timely and effective implementation of the Project, including the provision of funds for the operation and maintenance of the Project facilities (excluding the AOs set up under the Project), during and after Project implementation, and for the upgrading of the 66 existing thana veterinary dispensaries to become thana Livestock Development Centers. The Borrower shall ensure that recurrent budgetary provisions for the recurrent salary cost for DLS under Part D of the Project, and for operation and maintenance cost of the district-level veterinary hospitals (including disease diagnosis laboratories and field analysis


Appendix 8 44


Loan Agreement


laboratories) provided under the Project are adequately provided on a timely basis, during and after Project implementation. The Borrower shall keep the Bank informed on measures taken relating to standards set for livestock production, animal feed, animal vaccines and medicines, quality control, and related environmental protection and control standards. For this purpose, the Borrower shall, at the end of each year of project implementation, provide the Bank with an annual report on any measures taken on these matters.

Schedule 6.18

Complied with.

The Borrower shall ensure that the Project Director and the senior-level staff member heading the PLU are retained during the implementation period of the Project.

Schedule 6.19

Complied with.

The Borrower shall (i) within one year after the Effective Date, provide the Bank with a time-bound action plan, satisfactory to the Bank on phasing out of subsidies on livestock products produced by DLS; and (ii) implement, to the satisfaction of the Bank, the time-bound action plans agreed upon with the Bank for (a) the commercialization of the Veterinary Vaccine Production Laboratory (VVPL); (b) the phased imposition of cost recovery measures for all vaccines and drugs produced or sold through VVPL and other DLS outlets; and (c) the commercialization of Borrower-owned poultry production farms, starting with the two Borrower-owned poultry production farms in the Project area.

Schedule 6.20 Partly complied with. A time-bound action plan was submitted to ADB. By raising the vaccine price, the MOLF showed willingness to phase in commercialization of the VVPL and poultry farms. Further, the MOLF promised to take more measures to commercialize VVPL and poultry farms.

Except as the Bank may otherwise agree the Subsidiary Loan Agreement shall have, inter alia, the provision listed below.

Schedule 6.21 Complied with. Subsidiary Loan Agreement was signed in accordance with covenant.

(a) The Borrower shall relend a portion of the proceeds of the Loan as a subsidiary loan to PKSF for purposes of carrying out Part A (i) of the Project. Such subsidiary loan shall be denominated in taka. Service charge shall be payable on the principal amount to the subsidiary loan withdrawn and outstanding from time to time at a service charge of 1.25 percent per annum. The amortization period shall be 20 years with a grace period of five years for each disbursement from the proceeds of the Loan. Repayment shall be permitted at any time without penalty. The foreign exchange risk shall be borne by a Borrower.

Appendix 8 45


Loan Agreement


(b) Within six months after the Effective Date, PKSF shall establish a revolving fund acceptable to the Bank for Microcredit operations related to livestock enterprises for poverty reduction under Part A (i) of the Project. The fund shall be financed through debt-service payments by the POs of subloans after deduction of the debt-service payments made by PKSF toward each subloan.

Schedule 6.21 Complied with by PKSF.

The Borrower shall ensure that PKSF selects the POs based on criteria agreed between the Borrower and the Bank. The Borrower shall ensure that PKSF utilizes the proceeds of the Subsidiary Loan to make subloans to POs that meet and maintain the following eligibility criteria: (a) Large PO (i) The PO has been operating a successful microcredit program including livestock for a minimum of five years; (ii) it has at least 100,000 borrowers with a strong potential for expansion; (iii) it has at least Tk100 million of equity (including foreign grants and surplus) of its own on the program; (iv) the debt-equity ratio does not exceed 2.5:1; (v) it maintains a strong and transparent accounting, management information system (MIS) and internal audit system; (vi) it has its accounts audited by a reputable external auditor on an annual basis; and (vii) the minimum loan recovery rate is 95 percent. (b) Small and Medium PO (i) the PO has a demonstrated track of running a successful microcredit program including livestock, or, in the view of PKSF, demonstrates the potential to do so after technical assistance and capacity building; (ii) the minimum loan recovery rate is 95 percent; (iii) the PO possesses adequate manpower for intensive

Schedule 6.22

Observed by PKSF as per criteria set forth. Complied with by PKSF.

Appendix 8 46


Loan Agreement


supervision, and has a good management committee; and (iv) the PO is using a standard double entry accounting system, or is willing to adopt it with PKSF’s assistance. The Borrower shall ensure that PKSF enters into a Subloan Agreement with each PO for making Subloans. The Borrower shall ensure that PKSF provides the Bank with a copy of each signed Subloan Agreement upon execution of such Agreement. Except as the Bank may otherwise agree each Subloan Agreement shall have, inter alia, the provisions listed below.

Schedule 6.23 Complied with. Subsidiary agreements signed between PKSF and NGOs during fourth quarter of 1998 in accordance with the covenant. Sub-loans were channeled according to covenant.

(a) PKSF shall make subloans to the PO for purposes of financing microcredits under Part A (i) of the Project. Such subloans shall be denominated in Taka, service charge payable on the principal amount of the subloan withdrawn and outstanding from time to time and the period of amortization shall at a minimum be as follows: for small, medium and large POs, the service charge shall be not more than 6.25 percent per annum, with a repayment period of up to three years, and PKSF shall decide on the specific maturity and grace period, based on a review of the ability of the PO to reply from its surplus and reflows. PKSF shall use the spread of up to five percent to include evaluating and selecting NGOs as POs, monitoring their performance, training NGO staff in financial management, operating cost, credit risk and profit.

Complied with.

(b)The PO shall utilize the proceeds of subloans to finance microcredit to beneficiaries for eligible activities.

Complied with.

(c) Microcredits shall be denominated in taka. The POs shall ensure that the service charge on microcredit shall be at the prevailing market rate, with a margin of at least 9.75 to 13.75 percent to include social mobilization, group formation, social awareness training, skills training, monitoring loan collections, extension activities, other operating cost, allowance for bad debts and profit. The other terms and conditions, and procedures in the financing of microcredits by the POs shall be determined by the PO in accordance with its usual practices and in consultation with PKSF.

Complied with.

(d) The first time beneficiaries of the POs shall be persons who fulfill the following eligibility criteria or other criteria as agreed between

Complied with.

Appendix 8 47


Loan Agreement


PKSF and the PO from time to time: (i) permanent residents of rural areas in the Project area; (ii) possess arable land not exceeding 0.2 ha; (iii) total assets do not exceed the value of 0.4 ha of arable land in their locality; and (iv) must be members of a savings group organized and monitored by the PO directly.

Appendix 9 48

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF THE POULTRY MODEL PRODUCTION CHAIN AND BEEF FATTENING

A. Objectives and Characteristics 1. Poor households constituted 95% of the project beneficiaries. The remaining 5% was marginal farmers. The main objective of the Project was to enhance the income of this poorest group through poultry rearing using the semi-scavenging system1. The flock size of birds for rearing was determined based on the likely amount of scavenging food available within and around the homestead. 2. The key rearer was identified as both the poorest segment and the nucleus around which other segments of the poultry model production chain (PMPC) revolve. It was envisaged that the key rearers would rear birds free of interference from routine daily activities or other income-generating activities. Other poultry enterprises were model breeders, mini hatcheries, and chick rearers, which were established to support key rearers in the area. Poultry workers, feed sellers, and eggs sellers supported poultry healthcare, feeding, and market services. 3. Activities of different components within the PMPC are illustrated in Figure A9.1. It was recommended that 3,860 key rearers would rear 5–6 Sonali birds (Fayoumi x Rhode Island Red) for egg laying and another four local broody hens to brood Sonali eggs and local eggs for additional income. The day/night shelter and polo housing systems2 and the strict cafeteria feeding system3 were introduced to ensure semi-scavenging feeding. Pure lines of Fayoumi hens and Rhode Island Red cocks, with increased flock size (54 female Fayoumi and six male Rhode Island Reds) were recommended for rearing by model breeders under the macha4 system. About 200–300 Fayoumi, Rhode Island Red, or Sonali day-old chicks were recommended for rearing by 40 chick rearers under the macha system. The pullets were sold to model breeders and key rearers, while the rest were sold to the market. Ten egg sellers collected the table eggs from key rearers and supplied the eggs to the community center or local market. Ten feed sellers then procured feed ingredients from the local market, mixed the ingredients according to recommended criteria to make balanced rations, and sold them to PMPC beneficiaries or other farmers. The function of 100 poultry workers was defined to collect vaccines from upazila5 livestock development centers, maintain the cold-chain, and vaccinate all PMPC and other birds against prevalent diseases. In addition, poultry workers could handle primary treatment of birds and vaccination of goats. The main function of the mini hatcheries was to hatch hen eggs using the rice-husk method of incubation,6 collect eggs from model breeders, and distribute the eggs to chick rearers and key rearers (Figure A9.1). B. Findings

1. Package Distribution

1 A system wherein, additional limited feeding is provided to compensate 20–30% nutrient/food shortages normally

happen under scavenging system. 2 A system of sheltering poultry birds kept under bamboo made cages used in the dwelling houses. 3 A feeding system wherein, different food ingredients are provided in compartmentalized bamboo trays that are kept

in the shelter. 4 Bamboo made platform. 5 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana. 6 Rice-husk method of incubation, wherein, eggs are embaded in rice husks placed in bamboo made drum for

incubation.

Appendix 9 49

4. In the project appraisal it was stipulated that 364,000 packages, which consisted of 360,005 PMPC packages (342,917 key rearers, 3,560 chick rearers, 534 mini hatcheries, 2,314 model breeders, 890 feed sellers, 890 egg sellers, and 8,900 poultry workers) and 4,055 beef-fattening packages would be distributed among beneficiaries (Appendix 4). Although goat-rearing activities were included in the project document, no package size was mentioned and caution was recommended until an effective peste des petits ruminants (PPR) vaccine was introduced. Packages had been introduced as follows by June 2003: key rearers—315,825 packages (92% of target); chick rearers—3,227 (91%); mini hatcheries—289 (54%); model breeders—1,707 (74%); feed sellers—849 (95%); egg sellers—870 (98%); poultry workers—4,775 (95%); and beef-fattening—3,988 (99.7%). But packages were further extended to 39,101 key rearers, 2,683 model breeders, 587 mini hatcheries, 3,916 chick rearers, 3,569 poultry workers, 1,080 egg sellers, 1,062 feed sellers, 5,849 beef fatteners, and 3,372 goat rearers. During TA extended period e.g., up to 31 December 2003, different enterprises under PMPC continued to operate and in some cases intensified, although number of key rearers declined (8%).7

2. Technology Adoption

5. Major findings from interviewing nongovernment organizations (NGOs), Department of Livestock Services (DLS) upazila livestock office (ULO) field staff, and project beneficiaries were as follows: 6. Key rearers. Key rearers adopted technologies such as cafeteria feeding, day sheltering, and use of bamboo-made baskets for broody hens as long as monitoring from the Project continued. Key rearers found these technologies costly if they followed the recommended usage criteria. As such they gradually switched over to cheap items, especially clay baskets for brooding. Expected income was not commensurate with flock size. Thus, many key rearers increased the flock size of Sonali day-old chicks by 10–15 or switched over to pure local bird or Fayoumi. The relevance of flock size to availability of semi-scavenging feed was ignored since beneficiaries found it economical to procure prepared feed for their bigger flocks. Mixed feed or ingredients from feed sellers were not of good quality on many occasions. 7. Technology adoption was also affected by reduced or interrupted production and supply from other PMPC enterprises and DLS farms. However, the concept of semi-scavenging feeding1 (i.e. allowing birds to feed on concentrated mesh or pellets prior to or after scavenging) was adopted by key rearers. Routine vaccination also was welcomed and adopted by key rearers. The NGO, Thangamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha, established its own parent stock farm for Fayoumi and Rhode Island Red birds, and supplied Sonali, Fayoumi, and Rhode Island Red day-old chicks, pullets, and cockerels to its beneficiaries. These technologies (rearing day-old chicks, semi-scavenging feeding, routine vaccination etc.) had horizontal expansion and encouraged many neighbors to engage themselves in poultry rearing. 8. Key rearers who succeeded in consolidating their skills on semi-scavenging rearing and did not have to depend on poultry workers for vaccination were able to increase their flock size and turn to the litre system of rearing.8 They preferred Sonali local and Fayoumi over hybrid birds due to the formers' better disease resistance and agility. Building capacity contributed

7 Danida 2003. Project Completion Report. Dhaka. Danida.; Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation. 2003. Progress

Report. 8 A system of intensive poultry rearing, where birds are reared on floors or platforms covered with saw dust and

straw.

Appendix 9 50

directly to increased revenues. Successful key rearers did not depend on model breeders to ensure the flow of fertile eggs or day-old chicks from the hatcheries. Rather, they used their own broody hens to brood eggs produced by their own hens. Beneficiaries in most project areas reported inadequate supplies of Sonalis coming from DLS farms. This was due to limited production or absence of coordination by concerned NGOs after project completion. In such circumstances, beneficiaries collected Sonali day-old chicks from DLS farms using their own collection mechanism. Confinement through the litre or polo system was used for rearing chicks, which were provided with prepared feed for at least 4 weeks after they hatched. 9. The flow of Fayoumi and Rhode Island Red day-old chicks from DLS farms was frequently interrupted. This consequently affected adaptation of this breeding technology for model breeders and key rearers. The recommended length of time to rear Sonali/Rhode Island Red and Sonali pullets is 2.5–3 months until egg production starts. But the credit repayment schedule began only 2 weeks after the credit was issued. That caused stress on model breeders. Supply of appropriate and balanced feed was not ensured, so chick rearers and model breeders often ended up with inferior-quality feed, resulting in poor pullet and cockerel production, which in turn led to poor quality eggs or delayed production of eggs. And also due to inadequate skill (3 days training), interrupted supply of electricity and reduced price for fertile eggs (Tk2.5 to Tk3.0 per piece) resulting from NGOs lack of coordination, that caused losses and thus opted out. When technical back-up services were relaxed, project support from NGOs discontinued, or credit repayment completed, beneficiaries quickly switched over to suitable or locally viable technologies, such as rearing hybrid layers. 10. Chick rearers. Despite some problems with technology transfer, most chick rearers were successful. Although they often suffered from interrupted electricity supply or poor feed quality, they still often managed to raise birds that weighed 500–600 grams within 8 weeks of rearing. They also managed to sell pullets and cockerels at 6 weeks of age, and sold the pullets as local birds and fetch better price. They could also sell pullets to non-project enterprises looking for birds that produced more eggs than local hens. Some chick rearers utilized their skills at rearing large flocks of hybrid birds to raise even larger flocks (500–1000) in order to enhance income.

11. Model breeders. Most model breeders (and some chick rearers) participating in the Project did not continue with the prescribed technology after their loans were paid off and/or project support withdrawn. Some utilized their experience and the facilities created during the project to rear hybrid layer and broiler birds. There was often more market demand for such birds and their eggs, creating good profit opportunities. While the price of hybrid eggs did not vary much from the price of local-bird eggs, hybrid eggs found increased acceptance on the market due to their bigger size. Beneficiaries also preferred rearing hybrid birds. 12. Mini hatcheries. Mini hatcheries' technology required 24 hours of intensive care for egg incubation; beneficiaries engaged in mini hatcheries could not manage this due to lack of continuous attention. The duration of the training was also insufficient for beneficiaries to get a handle on the complex technology. Furthermore, model breeders often supplied inferior-quality eggs. As such, majority of the hatcheries could not survive because of intensive requirement in the operation of the hatcheries. 13. Poultry workers. With up to 100 poultry workers operating per area, poultry workers faced stiff competition. Moreover, vaccines procured through ULOs or NGOs often failed to protect the vaccinated birds. Vaccines also often suffered from supply interruptions or inferior quality, probably due to improper cold-chain maintenance. As a result of these problems, most

Appendix 9 51

poultry-worker enterprises did not survive. Only able poultry workers who had strong forward and backward linkages and were proficient in cold-chain maintenance succeeded in vaccinating adequate number of birds in the area. Although they received only 3–7 days of training, these successful poultry workers were sincere in improving their skills through regular consultations with upazila livestock office staff. Only about 6% of the poultry workers survived from the originally trained 100 poultry workers per area office. In some areas poultry workers who developed skills in primary treatment of birds and vaccination of goats approached sustainability.

14. Feed sellers and egg sellers. Feed sellers in most instances were either not capable of mixing ingredients appropriately or received substandard, adulterated ingredients. This reduced demand from PMPC enterprises. Some survived by switching over to ruminant feeds or acting as agents for marketing prepared feeds from large feed-mill owners. Most egg sellers were not active; the ones who were active were more interested in making profit by collecting and selling eggs from all poultry in their area than in establishing links with model breeders, key rearers, and mini hatcheries. 15. Linkages of inputs and outputs between the different enterprises of the PMPC were not effectively maintained or streamlined by NGO field workers. Chick rearers failed to sell their pullets and cockerels at the expected price (Tk45 per pullet) to model breeders, key rearers, or the market. Similarly, model breeders rarely were able to get the recommended price for fertile eggs (Tk4 per piece) from mini hatcheries due to the absence of active mini hatcheries. In the coordinated demand assessment of key-rearer requirements, it was evident that there was fewer than the required number of key rearers in many areas. 16. Traders and vendors collected most eggs directly from the households of model-breeder and key-rearer beneficiaries. In some instances they sold these items directly to consumers. Beneficiaries with less bargaining power had to sell their products at slightly lower-than-expected prices. 17. It appeared that the supply chain, as illustrated in the PMPC (Figure A9.1), was not sustained as effectively as envisaged in the design objectives. Likewise, precise technology adoption, such as cafeteria feeding and day sheltering, failed to influence to adopt semi-scavenging rearing system1 at a desired level. Yet some project components were sustainable despite not being effectively linked with other components of the PMPC. The adaptability, skills, and ability of farmers to take advantage of market opportunities were paramount here. 18. Awareness creation for supplementary feeding and routine vaccination through establishing village organizations was most effective. Increased market demand for poultry meat and eggs drove beneficiaries to adopt poultry production technologies, mini hatcheries and model breeding schemes. 19. Beef fattening. There were few prescribed models in place regarding beef-fattening activities. The only restriction on beef fattening beneficiaries was that they avoid using female calves for fattening. Most farmers used improvised housing and administered regular vaccinations to their cattle. They fed their cattle straw—often urea-treated straw—as well as grasses from fallow land and some grains. Feed costs were low. Farmers reared their cattle for 4–6 months and made satisfactory profits. All beneficiaries considered their beef-fattening activities successful. Some beneficiaries risked rearing goats, taking all necessary disease-protection measures. They were also successful in making profits.

Appendix 9 52

Figure A9.1: Poultry Model Production Chain

(6) Enterprise 1 Mini Hatchery

Sale of

sterile eggs Collect vaccines through DLS or NGOs Purchase feed

ingredients from wholesaler or producers

(10) (10)

Enterprise 6 Egg Seller

(100) Enterprise 7 Enterprise 2 MarketPoultry Worker Feed Seller

Vaccinate all poultry birds of the area

Supply balanced feeds and feed ingredients to all poultry birds of the

area

Procure table eggs from others

Sale of fertile eggs

Replacement Pullets (24) (40) (3860) Sell of grown

up pullets Enterprise 5 Enterprise 3 Entreprise 4 Model Breeder Chick Rearer Key Rearer

Produce eggs Supply of grown up Fayoumi pullets

Procure RIR cockerels from DLS farms

Day-old chicks Hatchable Eggs Sell grown up cockerels to

open market

Abbreviation: DLS – Department of Livestock Services, NGO – nongovernment organization, RIR – Rohde Island Red Legend: Enterprise 1 (Mini Hatchery) – Collect eggs from model breeders and using rice husk method of incubation, about 500 eggs are hatched and sell day-old chicks to chick rearers; Enterprise 2 (Feed Seller) – Procure ingredients, make balanced feed and sell to the poultry keepers and others; Enterprise 3 (Chick Rearer) – Rear 300-500 birds and sell about 2 months old chicks to other beneficiaries and market; Enterprise 4 (Key Rearer) – Rear five sonali and four local broody hens for hatching of eggs, receive eggs from model Breders; Enterprise 5 (Model Breeders) – Rear 54 Fayoumi females and 6 RIR males, supply eggs to mini hatchery and key rearers; Enterprise 6 (Egg seller) – Collect table eggs from beneficiaries and others and sell to the market; Enterprise 7 (Poultry Worker) – Receive vaccines from DLS, provide vaccination and other primary health care services for poultry/livestock to beneficiaries and others of the community. Note: Numbers in bracket indicate number of enterprises per area, total number of area is 60.

Appendix 10 53

OPERATION OF DLS POULTRY FARMS AND VETERINARY VACCINE PRODUCTION LABORATORY—AN ASSESSMENT

1. According to the Loan Agreement, the Government of Bangladesh (the Government) agreed to submit a time-bound action plan within one year for phasing out subsidies on livestock products produced by the Department of Livestock Services (DLS). It was further agreed that the DLS would commercialize the veterinary vaccine production laboratory (VVPL), impose phase-wise recovery of cost for all vaccines and drugs produced or sold through VVPL and other DLS outlets, and commercialize DLS-owned poultry farms starting with two poultry farms located in the project area. In this context, the DLS, through the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, submitted a revised action plan on 4 October 1999. Accordingly, six of the 35 DLS poultry farms and hatcheries were transferred to government-authorized agencies. The Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock insisted on retaining 35 poultry farms within its administrative sphere because some farms were operating at breakeven point.1 It argued that the farms were fully engaged in producing day-old chicks for the government programs, NGOs, and private farms engaged in promoting the semi-scavenging Sonali breed. Around 80% of the recipients of day-old chicks during the Project period were poor beneficiaries. At present, around 20% of Sonali day-old chicks are delivered through NGOs, while the remaining 80% are collected directly by the beneficiaries or other farmers. Since these farms produce and maintain Rhode Island Red and Fayoumi parent stocks of Sonali (Fayoumi x RIR) and Fayoumi chicks—the breed proven to be suitable for semi-scavenging rearing—the Government anticipated that the breeding practices of these farms might be completely altered and the existing infrastructure facilities reoriented toward other commercial activities by NGOs or private farms if transferred to them. Moreover, most of these trained and experienced persons would be retrenched or pulled back by the DLS and be reemployed in areas inconsistent with their experience. Consequently, the Government’s plan to alleviate poverty through poultry-rearing activities would be seriously jeopardized. 2. Large NGOs like BRAC and Proshika have not yet shown any interest in producing semi-scavenging chicks. Instead they rely mainly on the Government farms to produce such chicks as well as other hybrids like NERA. At present the Government through its network of poultry farms and other rearing units, is producing 3.87 million day-old chicks—mostly Sonali and Fayoumi—annually. Of these day-old chicks, 0.7 million (20%) are procured by NGOs and the rest are used in Government farms to support poultry breeding and rural poultry programs, and by the backyard or mini poultry farms. The Government farms can deliver day-old chicks demanded by NGOs and private farmers, but NGO demand has declined as they have been supplying fewer inputs to beneficiaries since the Project ended. The exception is the five southern districts of Bangladesh, where demand for day-old chicks has increased due to activities associated with the Danish International Development Assistance (Danida)-sponsored Smallholder Livestock Development Project II. 3. Although the Sonali breed has become widely popular among farmers in the project areas—it has phenotypic similarities to deshi (local) birds but it fetches a better price, is more resistant to disease, consumes less food, is better adapted to the semi-scavenging system than hybrids, and produces more eggs than deshi or Fayoumi—no private firms are sufficiently convinced or aware of the Sonali breed's potential to invest in Sonali farms. Only one partner NGO (Thengamara Mohila Sabuj Sangha) has established a single Sonali parent-stock farm, which is producing around 8,000 day-old chicks per day but is unable to cope with the demand of its 1 DLS farms in Bogra, Jamalganj, Rangpur, and the central poultry farm, Mirpur, were running at breakeven point

(Source: DLS statements and Mission observations).

Appendix 10 54

beneficiaries. It sells day-old chicks for Tk12 per chick, compared with the DLS price of Tk10 per chick. It was observed that beneficiaries/rural farmers were interested in buying Sonali day-old chicks at Tk12 per chick, since that price was less than the price of hybrid day-old chicks. 4. During 2003–2004, the DLS earned Tk89.00 million against expenditures of Tk165.20 with a loss of 76.10 million. Farm income came from sales of day-old chicks, pullets, cockerels, and eggs. DLS poultry farms incurred a loss of Tk76.10 million in 2003–2004, compared to a loss of Tk98.0 million in 1999–2000, but it retained flocks worth Tk56.68 million. The data revealed reduction of loss by Tk22 million in 5 years time (Table A10.1). This led the DLS to believe that its farms could be run on a commercial basis, provided management is improved considerably. 5. A chance exists to bring these farms up to the breakeven point or even to make them profitable by enhancing the price of day-old chicks by Tk2 per chick and raising the price of table eggs to Tk12 per four eggs. The current price of table eggs is Tk10 per four eggs. Optimal utilization of existing facilities to prevent spillage of resources and reduce chick mortality from 5% to 3% will also improve profitability. Moreover, the condition of most of these farms is depleting and they are chronically short of funds to procure raw materials and meet contingency expenses. Since the DLS’ capacity to replenish these farms, strengthen their capacity, and provide necessary operational funds is limited, it would be practical to either commercialize these farms or privatize them. 6. Regarding the commercialization of the VVPL, the Government/DLS priced all vaccines in 1997–1998 and increased the price of vaccines for fowl cholera, fowl pox, duck plague, pigeon pox, and anthrax by 25–100% in 1998–1999. These vaccines are less important vaccines and constitute only about 13.7% of the total vaccines produced and sold by the VVPL. Demand is higher for ranikhet disease vaccine (RDV), baby chicks ranikhet disease vaccine (BCRDV), and foot and mouth disease (FMD) vaccines. In 2002, the Government/DLS further increased the prices of all vaccines by 10–20%. 7. However, these vaccine price hikes failed to reduce total vaccines subsidies. The VVPL currently spends Tk88.0 million annually, far below the Tk25.1 million it earns annually from the sale of 12 types of vaccines. The VVPL argues vigorously that subsidies should remain in place at current levels. Moreover, the Government/DLS anticipates that further increases in vaccine prices would dissuade smallholder farmers from paying for vaccines and would adversely affect the livestock-disease-control activities of the DLS, NGOs, and private farms. The Government/DLS also views vaccine price rises as politically sensitive. It has been observed that production of BCRDV and RDV can meet only 50% of domestic demand. Private firms like Fahim & Fahid and other importers are marketing livestock and poultry vaccines. Fahim & Fahid sells BCRDV/RDV vaccines for Tk0.15 per dose, compared to the DLS-VVPL price of Tk0.10 per dose. The company is gradually increasing its market share. Vaccine importers have also been expanding their market share by about 15% annually by focusing on vaccines not produced by the VVPL.2 Heavy subsidies on VVPL-supplied vaccines, especially poultry vaccines and the FMD vaccine, discourage importation of effective vaccines that are highly in demand. The price difference between DLS and private-importer vaccines is illustrated in Table A10.2. 8. The DLS has limited financial and human resource capacity to increase vaccine production to meet the increasing demand. Therefore, commercialization of vaccine production in conjunction with an increase in vaccine prices could be the best option for the DLS. It has been noted that farqmers are ready to pay for effective vaccines at affordable prices. Since RDV and BCRDV 2 DLS 2004. Annual Report for 2003–2004. Dhaka.; Bengal Overseas Limited.2003. Report. Dhaka.

Appendix 10 55

constitute 84% of the total domestic vaccine production and fetch 64% of total vaccine sales proceeds (Table A10.2), increasing RDV and BCRDV prices would likely help recovery and reduction of subsidy from the existing level (50%) for other vaccines. This would help VVPL reach the break-even point and upgrade its outdated equipment. Further savings could be realized by shifting VVPL scientists to other departments, since the present number is considered inflated in view of the limited research opportunities available at the VVPL. Currently each of the 10 vaccine-production sections at the VVPL is staffed with 4–5 scientists and 1–2 technicians, yet most of the scientists have little opportunities to contribute to vaccine production.

Table A10.1: Year-wise Statement of Activities and Expenditures of DLS Poultry Farms From 1999–2000 to 2003–2004

Expenditure (Tk ‘000) Balance (Tk ‘000)

Year

Layers (No.)

Egg

Production (No.)

Day-old Chick

Production (No.)

Chicks Under

Rearing (No.)

Income

(Tk ‘000)

Bird Feeds

Establishment Expenses

Total

1999–2000 51,810 9,284,270 4,741,788 175,094 72,964 65,687 105,295 170,982 (98,018)

2000–2001 52,965 9,859,357 5,100,048 220,893 75,254 65,475 108,579 174,054 (98,800)

2001–2002 50,053 9,369,815 4,241,152 219,880 67,574 80,000 123,086 203,086 (135,512)

2002–2003 42,607 7,983,754 3,093,156 193,425 67,617 110,000 153,307 263,307 (195,690)

2003–2004 44,042 8,226,676 3,869,656 218,023 89,087 60,000 105,172 165,172 (760,85)

Average 48,295 89,447,744 4,209,160 205,463 74,499 76,232 119,088 195,320 (120,821)

DLS = Department of Livestock Services, No. = numbers. Source: DLS 2004. Progress Report, Animal Production Division, Dhaka.

Appendix 10 56

Table A10.2: Vaccine Production and Price

Price per Dose in Taka

Sl. No. Type of Vaccine

Doses Produced in 2003–2004 by

VVPL

(‘000)

Production Cost Per

Dose (Tk)

Price per Dose (Tk)

Locally Produceda

(Tk)

Imported (Tk)

01. RDV 71,896 0.64 0.10 0.15x2 0.23

02. BCRDV 89,268 0.62 0.10 0.15x2 0.30

03. Fowl Pox 5,830 0.11 0.15 – 1.14

04. Pigeon Pox 264 0.11 0.10 – –

05. Fowl Cholera 4,340 0.68 0.20 – 7.46

06. Duck Plague 14,259 0.11 0.25 – –

07. Anthrax 2,864 0.47 0.30 – –

08. Block Quarter 606 2.13 1.10 – –

09. Hemorrhagic Septicemia +902 0.95 0.50 – –

10. FMD 200 20.25 5.0 – 28.80

11. PPR 1640 – 0.50 – –

12. Rabies (HEP) (LEP) 2 – 25.0

25.0 – 220.0

Sl. No. = Serial number, – = Not available, BCRDV = baby chick ranikhet disease vaccine, FMD = foot and mouth disease, HEP = high egg passage, PPR = pertis petit du ruminants, RDV = ranikhet disease vaccine, VVPL = veterinary vaccine production laboratory. a Locally produced by Fahim and Fahid (F&F) company. Source: DLS’s VVPL report 2003 and 2004 and Bengal Overseas Limited.

Table A10.3: Average Income and Expenditure of VVPL for 2003–2004

Item Amount (Tk million)

Total Income 25.1 Total Expenditure 88.0 Balance (Loss) (63.1)

VVLPL = veterinary vaccine production laboratory Source: DLS’s VVPL report 2003 and 2004 and Bengal Overseas Limited.

Appendix 11 57

LIVESTOCK DEPARTMENT AND PARTNER NGOs COLLABORATION 1. Collaboration between the Department of Livestock Services (DLS) and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) was assessed through discussions with upazila1 livestock offices, area offices, and field staff of partner NGOs, and through cross-checking with the project management unit (PMU), Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), and responsible local government officials. 2. Big NGOs like the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC) and Proshika used their core technical staff stationed at headquarters to train their technical program officers and program assistants. Only in cases of serious disease problems with beneficiaries' poultry, they did seek help from upazila livestock offices staff, whereas most other NGOs sought the help of upazila livestock offices staff for training their technical program officers, program assistants, and beneficiaries. Nevertheless, all NGOs collected Sonali, Fayoumi and Rhode Island Red day-old chicks and pullets directly from the DLS poultry farms, and supply was proportionate to demand, as measured through prior notes from NGOs to the DLS farms. Similarly, vaccines were regularly collected from upazila livestock offices either by NGO area officers or by poultry workers. Collection of day-old chicks and vaccines declined at the closing of the Project and onwards. 3. BRAC, Proshika, Grameen Krishi Foundation, and Health, Education and Economic Development infrequently involved upazila livestock offices in beneficiary selection. Project beneficiaries reported deficiencies in complying set selection criteria for beneficiaries by the NGOs. 4. Dissemination of technology was more effective when DLS and NGO collaboration was close or cordial. Most NGOs (BRAC and Proshika were exceptions) relied on upazila livestock officers and veterinary surgeons based in upazilas for technical support services such as technical training, vaccination, and advisory services. Increased supplies of Sonali, Fayoumi or Rhode Island Red day-old chicks were required for adoption of Sonali breeds by key rearers.

5. Most NGOs did not feel it necessary or economically viable to retain reasonably paid technical officers in the project areas. Most felt they were competent in microcredit operation and social mobilization. Most program officers and program assistants recruited through project funds were used for social, mobilization, and credit operations; barely 20 percent of their time—and that includes initial and follow-up training time—was allocated to transfer of poultry production technologies. 6. Upazila livestock office staff did not play an effective role in monitoring the NGOs, especially the large ones. As such, large NGOs acted on their principles and introduced hybrid (NERA) or other breeds instead of increasing the adoption of breeds suitable to semi-scavenging, like Sonali or Fayoumi. On the other hand, smaller NGOs collaborated closely with ULO staff to train both NGO field staff and beneficiaries on technology adoption.

7. Improved capacity of the Government, the DLS, ULOs and NGOs achieved through the Project was not effectively utilized. This was due to a lack of will among the various parties to work closely with each other. The coordinating role of the DLS and the ULOs was not respected by some NGOs, which excluded the ULOs from supervising the technology-transfer activities of the NGOs. 1 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana.

58 Appendix 12

PROJECT’S INITIAL SOCIOCULTURAL AND OTHER IMPACTS 1. The project completion review Mission visited the project areas to assess the institutional, socioeconomic, and other impacts of the Project. This trip took place from the first week of January 2005 to mid-March 2005. Visits were made to nongovernment organization (NGO) area offices (at least one visit to each participating NGO), the upazila1 livestock offices with which the NGOs collaborated, three district diagnostic centers, and three poultry farms. The Mission assessed institutional capacity through open-ended questioning of 12 NGO area officers, 12 upazila livestock officers, and 10 elected members of union councils. The goal was to assess technology adoption and the economic benefits of project activities. The Mission also made output assessments of the district diagnostic centers and Department of Livestock Services poultry farms through interviews of concerned officials. 2. The Mission assessed the socioeconomic and cultural impacts of project interventions on beneficiaries using semi-structured interviews of beneficiaries involved in the seven enterprises of the poultry model production chain (PMPC) and beef-fattening. Sixteen upazilas were randomly selected for visits; 45 beneficiaries representing all spheres of activity were targeted for interviews in each upazila. Although an attempt was made to interview all 720 of the targeted beneficiaries, it was possible to gather quantitative information from only 616 of them. Since the Mission took place about 2 years after completion of the Project, it was not possible to find all the anticipated beneficiaries. Area offices of the NGOs in the study areas were requested to provide a list of village organizations. The Mission did not seek help from NGOs’ field staff to locate the beneficiaries in order to avoid intimidation of beneficiaries by the NGOs. 3. The data presented in the tables at the end of this appendix is based on the information collected from the respondents. Respondent beneficiaries were more or less randomly selected from the various spheres of activity proportionate to the number of beneficiaries engaged in each activity. Although beef fattening activities were limited, an attempt was made to collect information from at least one beef fattener from each upazila. The Mission also discussed project implementation with the project coordinators of the concerned NGOs and technical staff members of relevant agencies—particularly the project management unit, the Department of Livestock Services, Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation (PKSF), the policy planning support unit of the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, and partner NGOs. 4. The findings of the survey and the feedback received on field visits were compared with the available progress reports and monitoring data. The field visits, discussions with the concerned officials and field surveys provided enough information and data for an initial assessment of the institutional, socioeconomic, and environmental impact of the Project, which is illustrated in the following paragraphs. 5. The project interventions helped increase poultry and beef-fattening activities in the area by significantly reducing poultry mortality through routine vaccination performed by the poultry workers. Increased meat and egg production by Sonali chicken, coupled with the relatively high prices fetched by these birds, encouraged non-members to rear Sonali. The above factors stimulated both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries to increase their Sonali flock sizes. In project areas where ethnic minorities were not used to rearing poultry due to religious taboos (such as Birol, Ghoraghat, Kaharol, and Pirgonj), beneficiaries quickly became enthusiastic about rearing poultry because of its reduced risk and quick economic return. Since rearing poultry did not interfere with other routine household activities, husbands of beneficiary women did not restrain 1 An upazila is the next administrative unit under a district, previously known as thana.

Appendix 12 59

their wives; rather, they encouraged them to rear poultry to improve their status within the family. 6. The project facilities and support mechanisms opened up opportunities for investment in poultry and livestock activities. Each project participant received microcredit facilities of Tk6,334 on average. In addition, the beneficiaries utilized credit facilities from other sources worth, on average, Tk3,521. Economic return was estimated on total investments, which comprised both project credit and credits received from other sources. Injection of cash flows for livestock activities has invigorated economic activities and market participation by smallholder farm families, which in turn should positively impact productive resource utilization. The positive overall economic rate of return from all project enterprises has shown points to income improvements for individual project participants. Although mini hatcheries, model breeders, and key rearers did not receive great economic benefits from the prescribed technology, it appears that some of the model breeders used poultry-rearing skill developed under the Project to rear more-profitable hybrid layer birds. Similarly, a number of key rearers adapted improved feeding and routine vaccination technologies for rearing flocks of 10–20 local birds. Mini hatchers also used their skills for rearing local or hybrid poultry. Therefore, despite the failure of these beneficiaries to receive the expected benefits from the prescribed technology, they still received benefits in the form of greater awareness, skills, and motivation to undertake livestock-rearing activities. In addition, the increase in cash income motivated households to acquire more resources, increase their living standards, and increase their demand for quality inputs and technical services. The changes in the livelihoods of beneficiaries are briefly outlined. 7. Change in Land Ownership Pattern. Positive changes in land ownership reflected the status of economic empowerment in the rural areas. Of the sampled households, size of homestead increased by about 1.8% for each individual on average. Access to cultivable land increased by about 4.6% over the course of the Project (Table A12.1). Egg sellers and poultry workers acquired more homestead land than other groups because realistically they could almost double their incomes (Table 12.2) and use the extra earnings to expand their homesteads . Egg sellers and key rearers acquired comparatively more agricultural land. 8. Change in Household Income. Household income increased by 42% on average over the course of the Project, with feed sellers experiencing the largest increase (94%). Poultry workers’ incomes also increased substantially (85%). Model breeders experienced a smaller increase (41%), while key rearer households experienced the smallest increase (24%). Successful feed sellers and poultry workers were interviewed. Whereas the respondent key rearers were not able to increase their income substantially due to small flock size and difficulty in technology adoption (Table A12.2). 9. Changes in Poultry Livestock Ownership. By the end of the project period, poultry heads had increased by about 31%, goat and sheep ownership had increased 58%, cattle heads had increased 27%, and ducks had decreased by 9.5% (possibly due to lack of year-round suitable water bodies). Beneficiaries translated their increased incomes into additional productive resources (Table A12.3). There was an increase in goat ownership because goats can further enhance incomes. Beneficiaries also acquired cattle, which can enhance income by producing milk and calves. Although goats and cattle were also included in the project package, many of the beneficiaries were unwilling to use microcredit for more costly, risky activities like goat- and cattle-rearing. 10. Increase in Household Assets. Acquisition of household assets like radios, televisions, sewing machines, rickshaws, vans, bicycles, etc. reflects growing living standards in the rural

60 Appendix 12

community. For the rural poor, these are luxury items that are usually acquired only when cash becomes readily available. Possession of such items has increased in terms of both total number and percentage in the project area. Ownership of radio and television sets increased the most (Table A12.4) because of the high prestige and entertainment value of these items. At the family level, the next most popular asset addition was increased rickshaw and/or van possession (4.9%). 11. Changes in Living Standards. Access to sanitary latrines has increased, and a larger number of families have gotten electricity. Before the Project began, only 23% of the respondents had sanitary latrine facilities; by the end of the Project, 42% reported having sanitary latrine facilities—a substantial change. Access to tube well water also increased from 31% of all households in the project area before the project period, to about 40% after the Project (Table A12.5). Many qualitative changes have taken place in rural areas during the last decade. These changes have to do with the impact of income increases from all sources of economic activities, and from greater social participation of the rural households. Poultry and livestock activities resulted in more rapid income growth among beneficiaries and improved access to markets. 12. Increase in Savings. Beneficiaries were asked about total savings, excluding group savings. This revealed that since the Project ended, the level of savings has increased 13%. Savings has increased at different rates for the different project groups (Table A12.6). Mini hatcheries and model breeders reported zero savings since their activities were not profitable. Average savings from project-related activities was Tk5,691 per participating household; income from other sources increased at the same time. 13. Change in Family Consumption of Poultry and Livestock Products. Monthly average consumption of milk has increased 19% and monthly average consumption of eggs has increased 26%. Poultry meat consumption is up 11% and beef consumption is up 6%. This increase in consumption pattern of healthier foods has almost certainly improved nutrition among individuals in the project areas (Tables A12.7 and A12.8). Although mini hatcheries did not have much success with their business activity, they may have increased their consumption of animal products due to greater nutritional awareness or due to profitable poultry- and livestock-rearing activities unrelated to Project. However, all beneficiary groups emerged from the project richer. The microcredit size per beneficiary was around Tk10,000, probably they used part of this credit amount in other productive enterprises for better income. 14. Changes in Household Expenditure Patterns. Expenditures on food items have increased 34%. This increase was likely driven by families living near the poverty line. Expenditures on children's education have also increased 34%, while expenditures on clothing have increased 23% and expenditures on renovations of houses have increased 20%. The increase in household expenditures is related to the increase in overall family income. Overall expenditures per household increased 31% at end of the Project (Table A12.9). Meanwhile, expenditures on health care have gone down, indicating improvements in the health and nutritional status of project participants. 15. Participant’s Role in the Family. Individual contributions to the well-being of the family have increased since the Project began. The individual role/contribution has more than doubled (Table A12.10). Participants’ role in the utilization of earnings and savings has increased substantially.

Appendix 12 61

16. All of these positive socioeconomic trends were certainly accentuated by the Project. In particular, improved access to funds, training programs, and interactions with project officials and NGO workers all played a role. Such project interventions should be continued as a strategy for poverty reduction and a strategy to attain quality-of-life improvements within marginalized farm-based families (see tables in Appendix 12). This socioeconomic impact assessment is followed by an analytical assessment of the Project's economic internal rate of return (EIRR) in Appendix 13.

Table A12.1: Change of Land Ownership Pattern

Before Project After Project % Change

Sphere of Activity (n)

Homestead (Decimal)

Access to other lands (Decimal) a

Homestead (Decimal)

Access to other lands (Decimal)

Homestead (Decimal)

Access to other lands (Decimal)*

Beef Fattening (23) 13.2 82.8 12.5 85.4 -5.3 3.1 Chick Rearers (89) 15.9 71.4 15.5 72.9 -2.6 2.2 Egg Sellers (15) 12.0 48.9 14.1 54.9 17.2 12.3 Feed Sellers (15) 14.9 109.5 15.3 109.5 2.9 0.0 Key Rearers (391) 9.4 52.1 9.6 55.5 2.0 6.5 Mini Hatcheries (12) 11.9 51.3 12.1 53.6 1.7 4.6 Model Breeders (23) 13.4 51.8 13.8 52.4 2.9 1.1 Poultry Workers (48) 8.6 48.4 10.4 50.2 20.9 3.7

Average 10.9 58.9 11.1 61.6 1.8 4.6 n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. a Access to other land refers to leased land, purchased land or sharecropping. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.2: Change in Monthly Household Income Pattern a

Sources of Income

Before Project (Tk)

Sources of Income After Project

(Tk)

% Change Sphere of Activity (n)

Livestock

*Other

Total

Poultry/Livestock Related to

Project

Livestock Unrelated

to Project b *Other

Total

On total Income

Beef Fattening (23) 753 3,479 4,232 3,120 1,328 3,125 7,573 79 Chick Rearers (89) 557 3,209 3,766 1,328 947 3,340 5,614 49 Egg Sellers (15) 893 3,622 4,515 2,012 1,408 4,519 7,938 76 Feed Sellers (15) 846 8,575 9,421 2,667 5,795 9,800 18,262 94 Key Rearers (391) 601 2,626 3,227 386 776 2,876 4,038 25 Mini Hatcheries (12) 562 3,508 4,070 1,130 2,430 4,125 7,685 89 Model Breeder (23) 547 3,708 4,256 708 1,494 3,819 6,021 41 Poultry Workers (48) 949 1,126 2,074 1,328 1,263 1,247 3,838 85

Average 615 2,934 3,549 841 1,040 3,173 5,054 42 *Other means of income include selling fruits, selling vegetables, petty business, rickshaw pulling, or selling labor. Some beneficiaries reared two to three cattle at a time using funds from other sources in addition to microcredit. a Estimated amount mentioned by respondents. This is to mention that respondents in Bangladesh usually do not

disclose their income and expenditure figures. b Income from livestock unrelated to project means livestock inherited, received as a gift or procured using funds from

other income sources. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.3: Change in Poultry and/or Livestock Ownership

Before Project After Project % Change Sphere of Activity

(n) Poultry* Goat/

Sheep Cattle Duck Poultry* Goat/

Sheep Cattle Duck Poultry* Goat/

Sheep Cattle Duck

Beef Fattening (23) 8.4 3.5 2.0 8.1 11.2 10.2 3.1 11 33.3 191.4 55.0 35.8

Chick Rearers (89) 6.8

1.2 1.2 5.3 6.8 1.6 1.7 6.6 0.0 28.6 43.2 24.3

Egg Sellers (15) 6.2 0.3 2.0 1.0 8.6 1.7 1.2 3.0 38.7 400.0 (40.0) 200.0

Feed Sellers (15) 9.0 1.0 2.0 7.0 14.7 3.0 2.5 35.3 63.5 200.0 25.0 404.8

Key Rearers (391) 6.2 1.3 1.0 3.9 8.6 1.9 1.3 5.5 38.2 49.5 27.7 40.1

Mini Hatcheries (12) 5.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 6.4 1.6 1.6 1.0 18.5 300.0 166.7 0.0

Model Breeder (23) 10.2 1.2 2.0 5.0 11.4 2.0 2.0 2.4 12.1 66.7 0.0 (52.0)

Poultry Workers (48) 12.2 8.1 4.0 11.4 16.4 13.5 5.8 16.1 34.4 66.7 45.0 41.2

Average 6.5 1.2 1.1 4.2 8.5 1.9 1.4 3.8 30.8 58.3 27.3 (9.5)

62 A

ppendix 12

n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. * = Poultry means poultry other than the enterprises. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.4: Change in Possession of Household Assets by Enterprise Group

Before (% Respondents) After (% Respondents) Change (%) Sphere of Activity

(n) Radio TVSewing machine

Rickshaw/ Van Bicycle Radio TV

Sewing machine

Rickshaw/Van Bicycle Radio TV

Sewing machine

Rickshaw/ Van Bicycle

Beef Fattening (23) 8.0 7.5 2.5 0.2 4.2 11.2 12.0 4.1 0.5 6.0 3.2 4.5 1.6 0.3 1.8 Chick Rearers (89) 16.9

10.1 9.0 1.1 16.9 22.5 19.1 13.5 3.4 15.7 5.6 9.0 4.5 2.2 (1.1)

Egg Sellers (15) 13.3 6.7 6.7 0.0 13.3 26.7 20.0 6.7 6.7 6.7 13.3 13.3 0.0 6.7 (6.7)

Feed Sellers (15) 6.7 13.3 20.0 0.0 20.0 26.7 46.7 20.0 6.7 33.3 20.0 33.3 0.0 6.7 13.3

Key Rearers (391) 7.9 5.6 2.8 4.6 4.1 14.8 10.5 4.3 11.8 6.6 6.9 4.9 1.5 7.2 2.6

Mini Hatcheries (12) 16.7 16.7 8.3 8.3 16.7 25.0 16.7 16.7 0.0 25.0 8.3 0.0 8.3 (8.3) 8.3

Model Breeders (23) 26.1 21.7 0.0 4.3 13.0 34.8 34.8 8.7 0.0 13.0 8.7 13.0 8.7 (4.3) 0.0

Poultry Workers (48)

6.2 2.5 1.6 0.5 2.8 8.3 2.9 1.2 1.0 3.1 2.1 0.4 (0.4) 0.5 0.3

Average 9.3 6.7 3.7 3.4 6.7 15.7 12.7 5.8 8.3 8.4 6.4 6.0 2.1 4.9 1.7n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. Source: Mission’s field survey.

Appendix 12 63

Table A12.5: Change in Pattern of Living Standards

Before Project

(% Respondents) After Project

(% Respondents) Change (%)

Sphere of Activity

(n)

Sanitary Latrine Users

Access to

Electricity

Access to Tube well

Water Sanitary Latrine

Access to

Electricity

Access to Tube well

Water Sanitary Latrine

Access to

Electricity

Access to Tube well

Water Beef Fattening (23) 58.3 24.8 60.9 67 27.8 69.6 8.7 3.0 8.7

Chick Rearers (89) 29.2 18.0 42.7 56.2 33.7 50.6 27.0 15.7 7.9

Egg Sellers (15) 33.3 6.7 40.0 66.7 20.0 53.3 33.3 13.3 13.3

Feed Sellers (15) 26.7 13.3 53.3 53.3 46.7 60.0 26.7 33.3 6.7

Key Rearers (391) 23.3 10.7 30.9 43.0 15.3 42.5 19.7 4.6 11.5

Mini Hatcheries (12) 41.7 25.0 33.3 66.7 25.0 41.7 25.0 0.0 8.3

Model Breeders (23) 52.2 34.8 60.9 65.2 34.8 52.2 13.0 0.0 (8.7)

Poultry Workers (48) 46.7 14.6 45.8 69.2 22.9 60.4 22.5 8.3 14.6

Average 23.2 11.7 31.0 42.0 18.0 39.8 18.8 6.3 8.8 n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.6: Cumulative Savings Status (Taka)

Sphere of Activity

Before Project

After Project

% Increase in Savings from

other Incomes

Saving from

Other Incomes*

Savings from Project Related

Activities

Savings from Other Incomes*

Total

Beef Fattening (23) 2,384 2,120 2,715 4,835 13.88 Chick Rearers (89) 625 8,757 1,375 10,132 120.00 Egg Sellers (15) 3,833 12,383 3,833 16,217 0.00 Feed Sellers (15) 29,000 12,717 30,750 43,467 6.00 Key Rearers (391) 3,226 3,835 4,363 8,198 35.24 Mini Hatcheries (12) 0 6,800 0 6,800 0.0 Model Breeders (23) 0 4,500 0 4,500 0.0 Poultry Workers (48) 1,219 5,542 1,103 6,646 (9.55)

Average

3,594

5,691

4,053

9,744

12.77

n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. *Savings from other incomes includes savings from petty businesses, crop/vegetables/fruit growing, poultry/livestock rearing outside project activity sphere and wages and group savings. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.7: Monthly Average Consumption Pattern of Animal Products

64 Appendix 12

Before AfterSphere of Activity

(n)

Poultry meat (kg)

Beef (kg)

Eggs (No.)

Mutton (kg)

Milk (Liter)

Poultry meat (kg)

Beef (kg)

Eggs (No.)

Mutton (kg)

Milk (Liter)

Beef Fattening (23) 1.6 2 17.5 1 26 2.2 1.6 21.5 0.5 27.7Chick Rearers (89) 1.5

1.5 17.3 1.0 3.1 1.8 1.6 22.5 1.1 3.7Egg Sellers (15) 1.3 2.8 15.9 0.9 4.2 1.5 2.9 17.7 0.9 4.4Feed Sellers (15) 1.4 1.7 16.9 1.5 2.5 1.9 2.2 21.9 1.7 3.3Key Rearers (391) 1.0 1.2 13.0 1.0 2.7 1.3 1.7 15.2 0.9 3.7Mini Hatcheries (12) 1.4 1.7 18.6 0.5 3.3 2.5 2.0 25.8 0.8 4.0Model Breeders (23) 4.5 2.4 16.3 1.3 3.2 2.4 2.4 20.6 1.5 4.4Poultry Workers (48) 1.8 1.1 10.6 1.3 17 2.1 1 14.2 0.7 22

Average 1.8 1.8 15.8 1.1 7.7 2.0 1.9 19.9 1.0 9.2n = number of observations, kg = kilogram, No. = number. Note: Total number of observations = 616. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A2.8: Change in Monthly Average Consumption Pattern of Animal Products

Change in Percentage Sphere of Activity

(n)

Poultry Meat (kg)

Beef (kg)

Eggs (No.)

Mutton (kg)

Milk (Liter)

Beef Fattening (23) 37.5 (20.0) 22.9 (50.0) 6.5Chick Rearers (89) 20.0

6.6 30.4 10.0 19.5Egg Sellers (15) 15.3 3.5 11.3 13.3 4.8Feed Sellers (15) 35.7 29.4 29.5 (10.0) 24.2Key Rearers (391) 30.0 41.7 16.5 10.0 36.7Mini Hatcheries (12) 78.6 17.6 39.0 60.0 21.2Model Breeders (23) 46.6 0.0 26.1 15.3 37.5Poultry Workers (48) 16.7 (10.0) 34.0 (46.2) 29.4

Average 11.1 5.6 26.0 0.0 19.5 n = number of observations, kg = kilogram, No. = number.

Note: Total number of observations = 616. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Appendix 12 65

Table A12.9: Change (%) in Household Expenditure Pattern

Change in Percentage Sphere of Activity (n)

Food Clothing TreatmentHouse

Renovations Children’s Education Social Total

Beef Fattening (23) 30 32 16 10 38 10 26 Chicks Rearers (89) 25 25 16 30 25 10 24 Egg Sellers (15) 49 7 13 20 54 9 44 Feed Sellers (15) 37 46 (28) 30 25 5 33 Key Rearers (391) 31 2 (15) 40 30 10 28 Mini Hatcheries (12) 41 23 12 30 0 0 41 Model Breeders (23) 23 20 (36) 25 25 0 20 Poultry Workers (48) 29 57 72 20 25 (3) 28 Average 34 23 (7.3) 20 34 9 31 n = number of observations. Note: Total number of observations = 616. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Table A12.10: Beneficiary Participation (Number) in Family Decision Making

Before After Area of Decision

Higher Role (%)

Moderate Role (%)

Low Role (%)

No Response

(%)

Higher Role (%)

Moderate Role (%)

Low Role (%)

No Response

(%) Utilization of earnings/ savings %

23 4.22

235 43.12

272 49.91

86 14.00

156 28.62

219 40.18

157 28.81

84 13.60

Education of children %

26 4.77

269 49.36

152 27.89

169 27.40

86 15.78

261 47.89

105 19.27

164 26.60

Selling livestock/ poultry %

27 4.95

210 38.53

254 46.61

125 20.30

101 18.53

237 43.49

162 29.72

116 18.80

Marriage of boys/ girls %

18 3.30

165 30.28

123 22.57

310 50.30

38 6.97

167 30.64

101 18.53

310 50.30

Note: Total number of respondents = 616. Sources: Mission’s field survey.

Appendix 13 66

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT ACTIVITIES

1. The project completion review (PCR) Mission estimated the economic internal rate of return (EIRR) and compared the results with the appraisal estimates. The benefit of the Project in economic terms has been calculated considering the returns from all project components and covering the poultry model production chain (PMPC). The EIRR for overall investments in all enterprises was estimated based on the direct cash flows generated by the enterprise investments (data set attached). The task of coming up with cash flows and the discount rate was challenging because it was difficult to base these on real price changes. Largely open economy allows negligible subsidies on material inputs, competitive environment in the subsector, and free-floating exchange rates. All these prevailing prices for poultry and livestock inputs and outputs are truly market-based. This analysis is expressed in economic prices at domestic price levels, net of taxes or subsidies. Non-tradable outputs have been valued at competitive market prices, since all incremental final outputs were marketed domestically using a standard conversion factor assumed during the feasibility study. 2. A standard conversion factor of 0.87 is used to convert market prices to economic prices and accounting costs to economic costs. Conversion factors of 0.65, 0.75, and 0.87 are used to convert market wage rates to shadow wage rates for unskilled labor, unskilled farm labor, and skilled labor, respectively. These conversions have been done to arrive at economic prices for inputs and outputs related to project activities. This in turn aids in comparing the estimates of the project feasibility study with the PCR Mission’s estimates. EIRR signifies whether a project investment really yielded economic benefits to the project participants. Indirect benefits, such as, gains in human nutrition by consuming increased poultry outputs, and direct environmental benefits, such as, manure production from cattle and poultry, were not quantified and used in the economic analysis. The benefits of participatory research have also not been included, in line with the approaches followed during the feasibility study of the project design. 3. The financial analysis covered cash investments, including microcredit received by the sampled households from project-sponsored sources and other sources. Recipient households were involved in the following PMPC enterprises of key rearing, chick rearing, mini hatcheries, pullet rearing, model breeding, and poultry-worker, feed-seller, and egg-seller activities. Operating costs comprise all business-related input and material costs, including labor costs, incurred by the beneficiaries. Total revenues are equal to the monetary value of outputs and related byproducts and services produced by project-funded activities. It is assumed that benefits will continue to be generated for a period of 20 years, including the project period. These additional benefits stem from the skills and knowledge gained and the technologies adopted during the project period. 4. Demand for poultry and livestock products in the country has increased recently due to population growth, growing nutritional awareness, rapid urbanization, and annual average per-capita real-income growth of around 4%. This has created opportunities for growth in the poultry and livestock subsector. The Project has certainly given participating farmers a chance to exploit that growth potential in project areas. The Project’s impacts are discussed in Appendix 12. 5. Overall project investments in the selected enterprises yielded an EIRR of 16.78% based on direct benefits and costs, which was below the appraised estimate of 25.6%. This discrepancy was mainly due to poultry mortality, a lower-than-expected level of investments from the Project (only 55% of the committed fund was utilized), and rise in input prices, which

Appendix 13 67

caused lower return on investment. The participating households also did not or could not fully accept all the implementing agencies' technical recommendations relating to stock selection, feeding practices, and disease and pest control. The problems associated with insufficient technology adoption are detailed in Appendix 9. 6. Income was generated from the following enterprises under the Project: key rearing, chick rearing, mini hatcheries, model breeding, poultry worker, feed selling, egg selling, and beef fattening. The Project's effect on household income is broken down by sphere of activity in Table A12.2 of Appendix 12. Overall average household income increased by 42% during the life of the Project. 7. In the PMPC, key rearers were both the poorest and the largest segment of beneficiaries. Key-rearer households generated the second-lowest income of all enterprises targeted by the Project; the lowest income was generated by poultry workers. That the second lowest per-beneficiary income was generated by the largest microcredit recipient group had something to do with the lower-than-expected income increase reflected in the EIRR estimate. 8. Of the seven spheres of activity targeted by the Project, key rearing, model breeding, and mini hatcheries produced the least attractive accrued returns. But the skills acquired through the implementation of these activities offer long-term benefits to households that operated in these spheres. Such households are poised to enter into other income generating enterprises, such as rearing hybrid broilers, layers and local birds. There may also have been substantial multiplicative effects in increasing beneficiaries' (and even non-beneficiaries') incomes for non-project-related poultry- and livestock-rearing activities. 9. Moreover, this estimate was based only on the direct economic benefits for project beneficiaries. The estimate did not take into consideration direct environmental benefits generated by project activities. Nor did it take into consideration indirect benefits derived from activities related to backward and forward linkages, economic benefits derived from the participatory and research activities of agencies involved in the Project, or benefits of institutional support. 10. The rate of return is quite attractive if the ongoing interest rate in financial markets during the period is considered (12.0% on term deposits at the time). The steady growth of livestock-rearing activity initiated by the Project will also substantially increase returns in the future. There have been substantial trickle-down benefits of such projects, even to the households surrounding the project participants. These benefits were not covered in the samples for this assessment. 11. After debt servicing, the project beneficiaries should be able to operate without microcredit support simply by utilizing their newly learned technological know-how and recycling their earned income. The bulk of debt servicing occurs within two years of receipt of the credit.

Appendix 13 68

Table A13.1. Economic Cost and Yearly Benefit Stream (Tk)

Year Investmenta Operating

Cost Total CostIncremental Revenues

Net Cash Flow on Investment

1999 79,013 32,512 111,525 129,660 18,135 2000 90,263 34,425 124,688 138,663 13,975 2001 78,468 36,337 114,805 125,515 10,710 2002 53,545 38,250 91,795 114,105 22,310 2003 72,309 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2004 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2005 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2006 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2007 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2008 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2009 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2010 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2011 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2012 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2013 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2014 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2015 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2016 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2017 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665 2018 0 35,496 107,805 126,471 18,665

Economic internal rate of return= 16.78%.

a Investment per beneficiary; this includes microcredits issued under the Project and credits issued by other sources to the sampled households; the number of credit recipients varied from year to year. Source: Mission’s field survey.

ACTUAL ACHIEVEMENT AGAINST APPRAISAL TARGET BY ACTIVITY

Year of Project Activities Sl. Item of

Activities 1997–1998 1998–1999 1999–2000

2000–2001

2001–2002

2002–2003 Remarks

01

Civil Works

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

Reasons for delay were lengthy procedures in

Sl. = SeLegend

Equipment and Furniture

Microcredit

Training

Transport

Manpower

Other Support Services

TA Applied Research

appointing the project director and the chief technical adviser, and the devastating floods of 1998. Above problems were addressed by extending the project period by 1 year, following the recommendation of the midterm review mission.

Appendix 14 69

rial : Appraisal = Actual =

70 A

ppendix 15

PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART

Government of Bangladesh

Danida Liaison Office

Ministry of Finance Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock Project

Steering CommitteeCentral

Bank

Palli Karma Sahayak Foundation

Project Department of Livestock Services Coordination

Committee Project Liaison Unit Regions (2)NGOs

Consultant Services and Fellowships

Project Management

Unit Districts (17)60 Area Offices

(Rangpur)

Upazilas (89)Village Organizational Units

Services through NGOs

Upazila Coordination Committees

Credit Groups

Project Field Activities (monitoring, evaluation, training, studies,

extension, etc.)

Farmers (especially women and the landless)

Poultry Field Services

Beef Goats

Abbreviation: NGO - nongovernment organization. Legend: Major implementing bodies, which provided inputs and services. Other linked and monitoring bodies.

participatory livestock development project (loan · pdf fileparticipatory livestock...

Documents