Feed the Future District Profile Series - February 2017 - Issue 1

Builsa South is one of the districts in the Upper East DISTRICT PROFILE CONTENT Region. It shares boundaries with the Builsa North 1. Cover Page district to the north, Mamprugu Moagduri District in the Northern Region to the south, West Mamprusi District to 2. USAID Project Data the west, and the Sisala East District in the Upper West 3-5. Agricultural Data Region to the east. The district has a population of 39,336 of which 19,837 are females and 19,499 are 6. Health, Nutrition and Sanitation males. The average household size in the district is 4.2 7. USAID Presence persons. The boxes below contain relevant economic 8. Demographic and Weather Data indicators such as per capita expenditure and poverty prevalence for a better understanding of its develop- 9. Discussion Questions ment.

Poverty Prevalence 37.7 % Daily per capita expenditure 2.86 USD Households with moderate or severe hunger 31.7% Household Size 4.2 members Poverty Depth 18.6 % Total Population of the Poor 14,830

1 USAID PROJECT DATA

This section contains data and information related to USAID sponsored interventions in Builsa South

Table 1: USAID Projects Info, Builsa South, 2014-2016 Beneficiaries Data 2014 2015 2016 The number of direct USAID beneficiaries* Direct Beneficiaries 1,223 1 ,724 2 ,396 increased steadily during the observed period as Male 635 8 19 1 ,161 Female 588 9 05 1 ,235 Table 1 shows. However, the number is relatively Undefined small compared to other districts. Two nucleus farm- Nucleus Farmers 0 2 n/a ers are currently operating in the district and 13 Male 2 Female demonstration plots have been established to Undefined support beneficiary training. See Infographic 1 for the Demoplots 4 9 Male 1 5 demonstration plot disaggregate. Small agricultural Female 1 loans were facilitated by USAID intervention as Undefined 3 3 shown in Table 1. Direct beneficiaries yields and gross Production Maize Gross Margin USD/ha n/a 334.6 n/a margins for the district are also shown in Table 1. The Maize Yield MT/ha n/a 1 .98 presence of USAID development work is almost Rice Gross Margin USD/ha n/a 4 37.4 n/a average, with enough beneficiaries receiving direct Rice Yield MT/ha n/a 2 .75 n/a Investment and Impact assistance, small number of demo plots and some Ag. Rural loans 2 1,649 5 1,294 loans during 2014-2016. This resulted in a USAID USAID Projects Present 3 Beneficiaries Score 2.0 2 .0 2 .0 presence score*** of 1.7 out of 4. In addition, the Presence Score 2014-2016 1.7 district is flagged RED**** indicating that while the District Flag 2014-2016 Light Red project presence or intervention is average the Source: USAID Project Reporting, 2014-2015 impact indicators show regress as compared to 2012. Find more details on USAID Presence vs. Impact scoring on page 7.

Infographic 1: Demo Plots in Builsa South, 2014-2015 The presence calculation includes the number of direct beneficiaries and Agricultural 37** 13** Rural loans.

Demo Plots

5(Soyabean) 1(Rice) 9(Maize)

Crop Rotation, , New relesed Variety, ST Maize, S71680676 New Relesed Variety, Innoculation + Basil DT Maize, Early Maturing Variety Crop Phosphate, Crop Rotation, Pest Control, Harrowing, Genetics. Plouging, Harrowing, Planting in Planting in Rows, Fertilization, Inoculation Rows, Fertilization, Pest control

Source:: USAID Project Reporting, 2014, 2015

* “Direct Beneficiary, an individual who comes in direct contact with a set of interventions” FTF Handbook, 2016 , ** Total number of demo plots by commodity is different from the total because of crop rotation*** and ****Presence and Flag Ranges are explained in page 7 All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 2 AGRICULTURAL DATA

This section contains agricultural data for Builsa South*, such as production by commodity, gross margins and yields.

Figure 1: Share of Agricultural Production, by Commodity, in Builsa South, 2010 - 2015

Agricultural production in Builsa South involves several Sweet Potato Cowpea 8.2% 2.6% Soybean Groundnut 0.4% 16.5% commodities: rice, groundnut, maize, sorghum, sweet

Sorghum 15.1% Maize potato and others produced during 2010-2015 as shown 9.4%

Millet in Figure 1. Builsa South is one of the largest agricultural 11.1%

Rice 36.7% producers in the , accounting for 13.4% Source: Agriculture Production Reports 2011- 2015, MOFA of the regional production in 2015. The district is ranked Figure 2: Average Gross Margins and Yields in Builsa South by Commodity, USG -beneficiaries, 2015, USD/ha, first in the production of rice in the region. MT/ha 3.00 500.0 2.75 450.0 2.50 400.0 n Gross margins and yields of USAID beneficiaries for 1.98 i g r a s 350.0

d 2.00 l M e i s

Y 300.0 o s r i e G r 1.50 250.0 s a i i c

maize and rice are shown in Figure 2. e i r f 437.4 a e 200.0 i n c i f e e B 1.00 334.6 150.0 n e B 100.0 Yield data, presented in Figure 3, contain values of yields 0.50 50.0

- - of three commodities: maize, rice and soybean in 2015, Rice Maize USG Beneficiareis Gross Margin USG Beneficiareis Yields

2014 and 2013 as reported from three sources: MOFA, Source: Agriculture Project Reporting 2015, Agriculture Production Survey, 2013, Kansas State University

USAID project beneficiaries and APS. Yields of beneficia- Figure 3: Average Yields by Commodity in Builsa South, USG Beneficaries and district's average, 2013-2015, MT/ha ries are much higher than the district averages reported 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.28 2.18 2.06 1.98 2.00 by MOFA, as observed in Figure 3. 1.43 1.40 1.50 1.3

1.00 0.57 0.47 0.50 0.49 0.50 0.39

- Maize Soybean Rice Maize Soybean Rice Maize Soybean Rice 2015 2014 2013

Others-MofA USG Beneficiaries APS

Source: Agriculture Project Reporting 2015, Agriculture Report 2014, Mofa, Agricultrure Production Survey, 2013, Kansas State University * all MOFA figures refer to Builsa comprising Builsa South and Builsa South

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 3 AGRICULTURAL DATA

This section contains agricultural data for Builsa South*, such as production by commodity, gross margins and yields.

Table 2: Agricultural Production and Yields by commodity, in MT and MT/ha, 2010-2015, Builsa South Commodity 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 Total Cowpea 720 734 752 1,435 1,376 4,537 9,554 Groundnut 7,545 8,380 8,215 12,688 11,040 11,694 59,562 Maize 6,082 5,971 5,515 6,688 5,138 4,438 33,832 Millet 4,032 4,024 4,792 7,312 7,877 12,025 40,062 Rice 21,616 19,531 21,505 21,140 25,500 22,975 132,267 Sorghum 5,387 5,936 6,980 10,380 9,280 16,408 54,371 Soybean 138 148 174 252 210 450 1,372 Sweet Potato 5,580 7,263 9,702 7,200 29,745 Yields in MT/Ha 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 Cowpea 0.49 0.50 0.48 0.50 0.40 1.14 Groundnut 1.16 1.30 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.18 Maize 1.43 1.40 1.30 1.60 1.25 1.40 Millet 0.72 0.72 0.70 0.80 0.89 1.30 Rice 2.18 2.06 2.28 2.00 2.50 2.50 Sorghum 1.01 1.12 1.10 1.20 1.00 1.40 Soybean 0.47 0.50 0.57 0.60 0.50 1.00 Sweet Potato 9.00 10.23 12.60 8.00 10.00 Source: Agriculture Report 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 MOFA.

Table 2 above provides detailed information on specific commodities in respect of the overall annual production in Builsa South as well as average yields for the years 2010-2015. The infographic below shows a summary of agricultural statistics for Builsa South, as captured in the Agriculture Production Survey, 2013.

Infographic 2: Average Land size, Yields, Sales and other Farm indicators in Builsa South, 2013

$ - $ 38.0 0.39 0.39 4% 43.8 38.5

$ - $ TOTAL 0.49 0.49 0% 187.8 18.9 79.2

Average Land Size, ha Yield, MT/ha Sales, % Gross Margin*, USD/ha Variable Costs*, USD/farm Revenue in USD/farm

* all MOFA and APS figures refer to Builsa comprising Builsa South and Builsa South

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 4 AGRICULTURAL DATA

This section contains information on domains of empower- ment of Women Empowerment in Agriculture Index for Builsa South

What is the Women Empowerment in Agriculture Index? Women play a prominent role in agriculture. Yet they The Resources domain reflects individuals’ control face persistent economic and social constraints. over and access to productive resources. The Women’s empowerment is a main focus of Feed the Income domain monitors individuals’ ability to direct Future in order to achieve its objectives of inclusive the financial resources derived from agricultural agriculture sector growth and improved nutritional production or other sources. The Leadership domain reflects individuals’ social capital and comfort status. The WEAI is comprised of two weighted speaking in public within their community. The Time sub-indexes: Domains Empowerment Index (5DE) and domain reflects individuals’ workload and Gender Parity Index (GPI). The 5DE examines the five satisfaction with leisure time. domains of empowerment: production, resources, income, leadership and time. The GPI compares the Builsa South Results empowerment of women to the empowerment of their male counterpart in the household. Only female respondents results are displayed in Figure 4 based on the information collected on some of the This section presents the results from these indicators. empowerment indicators of the 5DE for Builsa South, Production Domain: No data is available on this part of a bigger survey conducted by Kansas State domain. University. Resource Domain: A majority of the women have a right to asset ownership and to purchase and move The Domains: what do they represent? assets– 67.3% and 85.7% respectively. Only 3.3% of the The Production domain assesses the ability of individuals women have the right to decide or have access to credit. to provide input and autonomously make decisions Leadership Domain: No data is available on this about agricultural production. domain. Time Domain: No data is available on this domain.

Figure 4: Results of Domains of Empowerment from WEAI 2015, in percent, Builsa South, 2015

90 85.7 80 70 67.3 60 50 40 30 20 10 3.3 0 Input in Control Over Asset Right to Access to and Group Public Satisfaction Satisfaction Production Use of Ownership Purchase Sell Decision on Membership Speaking with with Leisure Decision Household and Transfer Credit Workload Time Income Assets Production and Income Resources Domain Leadership Domain Time Domain Domain

Women Men All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 5 HEALTH, NUTRITION AND SANITATION

This section contains facts and figures related to Health, Nutrition and Sanitation in Builsa South

Infograph 3: Health and Nutrition Figures, Builsa South, 2015 Infograph 3 focuses on the health and nutrition of

women and children in the district. Percentages and

absolute numbers are revealed in the respective circles Women Women Underweight, Dietary 5.9% 536 for stunting, wasting, children and women underweight Diversity Score, 3.1 as well as Women Dietary Diversity Score: The WDDS is

based on nine food groups. A woman’s score is based on

the sum of different food groups consumed in the 24 hours

prior to the interview. Women Minimum Dietary Diversity Only 33.3%, 3,027, women reach minimum dietary (MDD-W) represents the proportion of women consuming a diversity minimum of five food groups out of the possible ten food Sources: PBS 2015, Kansas State University, 2015 groups based on their dietary intake. The Dietary diversity

score of women in Builsa South is 3.1, which means that

women consume on average 3 to 4 types of foods out of

Figure 5: Household dwelling Characteristics, Builsa South, 2015 10. Only one third (33.3%) reach the minimum dietary diversity of 5 food groups. The children health indicator Access to Electricity 28.6 values were not made available for this district.

Access to Solid Fuel 97.6 Figure 5 displays specifics of household dwelling, evaluat-

Persons Per Sleep Room 1.7 ed based on sources of water, energy, waste disposal,

Improved Sanitation 2.4 cooking fuel source, and the number of people per sleep room as measured from the PBS Survey, 2015. Access to Improved Water Source 81.0

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 Percent

Sources: PBS 2015, Kansas State University, 2015

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 6 PRESENCE VS. IMPACT MATRIX

This section provides an analysis of USAID presence vis-a-vis impact indicators in Builsa South

Presence vs. Impact reveals in more detail the presence of the Feed the Future Implementing Partners in the field, in combination with impact indicators measured by the Population Based Survey in 2012 and 2015: per capita expenditure & prevalence of poverty. This combination aims to show relevance of the presence of key indicators measuring progress/regress in the area. The following graphs are a print screen of the Presence vs. Impact Dash- board focusing on Builsa South.

In 2015, poverty increased by 18.9 percentage points to 17.1% compared to 2012. The population of poor is calcu- lated at 14,830. On the other hand, the per capita expenditure has stagnated with just a 4.4% increase compared to 2012. Given this stagnation, the other indicator- poverty- is the one that shows the progress/regress of the area. In this case, it is regress even though the assertion is backed by only one indicator. This is accompanied by an almost average USAID presence and a presence score of 1.7 out of 4. Therefore, the district is flagged light RED (average or above presence and one regressing impact indicator).

There were no improvement in Builsa North during 2014-2015. As Figure 6, shows there are more poor people than before in the district. The presence of USAID projects in the district has not yielded results. There’s the need for further reflection and research on existing intervention to understand the reason(s) behind these results to help in better understanding the situation in the district and inform possible adjustment of measures.

Figure 6: Poverty in % and Poverty Change in percentage points, 2012,2015, Builsa South 60.0% 40.0% USAID District Presence Score s 31.70% t

37.70% n 40.0% i o p

t e

n 20.0% g e a t c r 0.0% n

NO USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE e e

BUILSA SOUTH* c P r n e i -20.0%

P y t n r i

LOW USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE e -40.0% e v g o n P

-60.0% a Poverty Change h C

-80.0% 2012-2015 y

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE t r

-100.0% 18.9% e v o AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE -120.0% 0.0% P Poverty/ 2012 Poverty/2015 Poverty Change 2012-2015 ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE Figure 7: Population of Poor, Non - Poor Builsa South 2015

HIGH USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE 45000

40000 s

r 35000 e 30000 m b u

USAID District Presence Vs. Impact Flag n 24,506 25000 n i n

o 20000 i t a l

u 15000

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND p o

P 10000 CONTRADICTING IMPACT INDICATORS 14,830 5000

0 ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND BUILSA SOUTH* CONTRADICTING IMPACT INDICATORS Population Poor 2015 Population of NonPoor 2015

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND Figure 8: Per Capita Expenditure in 2012 and 2015, in USD/day; Per Capita REGRESSING IMPACT INDICATORS Expenditure Change in percent, Builsa South

Per Capita Exp. t e n

Change c

ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND y a 2.88 4.4% 20% e r d P

/ 2.86 USD

IMPROVING IMPACT INDICATORS 0% n i

D 2.86 S -20% g e U 2.84

n a n i -40%

2.82 h

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND s C e -60% r

2.8 s e t u i

IMPROVING IMPACT INDICATORS -80% r

d 2.78 t u -100% i e n d

p 2.76

x -120% ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND 2.74 USD e n E 2.74 p

-140% x t a E i 2.72 REGRESSING IMPACT INDICATORS p -160% t a a i p C 2.7

-180% a C e r

2.68 -200% P BUILSA SOUTH* e r

PC Exp. 2012 PC Exp. 2015 PC/Change P Source: Figure 9,10,11 Population based Survey, 2012,2015, Kansas State University, METSS, USAID Project Reporting 2014,2015

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 7 DEMOGRAPHICS & WEATHER

This section contains facts and figures related to Builsa South demographics, religious affiliation, literacy and weather indicators

Figure 9: Household Composition By Groupage, Builsa South has a population of 39,336 out of which Builsa South, 2015 19,837 are females and 19,499 are males. The average Children 0 to 4 11.9% Adult Males household size in the district is 4.2 persons. 26.2% The District lies in the tropical continental climacteric zone. Average precipitation and temperature are similar to the other districts in the Upper East Region. Figure 12

Children 5 to 17 shows the average maximal and minimal temperatures as 35.7% Adult Females well as yearly average precipitation. 26.2% Source: PBS 2015, Kansas State University Builsa South, like many other districts in the Upper East Region has a relatively young population as shown in

Figure 10: Religious Affiliation, Builsa South, 2010 Figure 9, with almost 50% of the population falling in the

Others No Religion age range: 0 to 17 years old. 0.6% 1.2% Catholic 10.1% In terms of religious affiliation, the majority of the popu- Protestant 9.8% lation are Traditionalists (56.4%) followed by Christians, who account for 37.8% of the population. For more

Pentecostal/Charismatic details refer to Figure 10. 11.7% The district has a high adult illiteracy rate with 78.3% of Traditionalist 56.4% Other Christians the adults having received no education. 9% went 5.2% Islam through only primary school while 12.7% made it further 5.1% to secondary school. Source: Builsa South District Analytical Report, GSS, 2014

Figure 11: Education Attainment in Builsa South, 2015 Figure 12: Average Accumulated Precipitation in mm and Average Temperature in Celcius, in Builsa South*, 2008 - 2015 Secondary Level Education 700 38 634.85 12.70% 621.18

36 s 600 i u m

34 l c e m 480.95 500 456.79 442.75 452.29 C

Primary Level i n 436.36 427.17 32

i n

Education 9.0% n 400

30 e r i o t u a 28 t a i t 300 r i p e

c 26 p

e 200 r m P 24 e T 100 22

0 20 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 No Educaton 78.3% Accumulated Percipitation, in mm Average Max. Temperature Average Min. Temperature Source: PBS 2015, Kansas State University Source: awhere Weather Platform, AWhere, 2016, * Data recorded in 2008-2012 refers to .

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 8 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

This section contains discussion questions and potential research topics as a result of the data and analysis presented on Builsa South

QUESTION I QUESTION 2

Why has poverty increased in Builsa South? Given Builsa South’s agricultural production, health and sanitation figures, as well as results from the presence vs impact matrix, where should USAID development work focus on in the next two years? What future development assis- tance would be helpful for Builsa South to turn the district flag green?

QUESTION 3

What other agricultural or nutrition focused development partner or GoG interventions have previously been implemented, are ongoing, and/or are in the pipeline that may impact Builsa South’s development?

The Feed the Future Ghana District Profile Series is produced for the USAID Office of Economic Growth in Ghana by the Monitoring, Evaluation and Technical Support Services (METSS) Project. The METSS Project is implemented through:

The information provided is not official U.S. government information and does not represent the views or positions of the U.S. Agency for International Development or the U.S. Government.

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 9