Civil Society Challenge Fund PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT 2014

Please read the following instructions carefully.

This project completion report template is designed to:

 enable you to communicate to DFID what your project has achieved  record project achievements against outcomes/outputs  draw out conclusions and learn lessons of value and wider application  check compliance with the terms and conditions of the grant; and  inform a wider analysis of all CSCF projects.

Some revisions have been made to this year’s form following feedback and discussions with CSCF grant-holders at the M&E Seminar held in October 2013.

What is required?

How  Use the 2014 Project Completion Report template (this document). Please note that, following feedback, the template is an unprotected WORD document. Please do not alter the structure or content of the template.  Cover the whole period of your project  Follow the instructions provided to ensure that you provide the information required  Ensure that you draw on and refer to the findings of your external evaluation  Refer back to your previous feedback letter(s) to guide completion  Submit the report and all accompanying documentation including separate annexes as WORD documents, not as pdf files.  Send it by email to [email protected]. Hard copies are not required.  Entitle your email “CSCF [reference number] PCR and closure documents”

When The project completion report and associated documents are required within three months of your DFID grant end date.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 1

What to send – use as checklist:

1. Narrative Report (this document)

Mark Section and Title Ideal Notes with an max no. of “X” pages 1 Basic Information 1 2 Progress and 3 In this section we ask you to report on Results progress since that covered by the last annual report, and then on overall results for the project. Please note that, as in the previous PCR, this section includes the consolidated beneficiary figures. 3 Risk assessment 0.5 4 Value for Money 1 Improved guidance and clearer questions. 4 Sustainability 0.5 Sustainability previously included in value for money. Clearer guidance. 6 Lessons 2 Only answer the questions which you feel are appropriate to your project. This section now has a blank box for writing about any other project experience or lesson. 7 Project 1 Previous questions asked in 2013 AR/PCR, accountability to replaced with one about your experience of stakeholders beneficiary feedback processes in action. Annex A Outcome and 6 Use ANNEX A to report progress against your Output Score logframe. Include an assessment of progress against each indicator, state the evidence which supports your statements and provide information about beneficiaries. Annex B Portfolio Analysis 5 Simplified scoring. More space, as requested, to explain methodology and process.

2. Project Documents (attachments)

Mark Document Notes with an “X” Photograph A new photograph(s) which illustrates or tells the story of your project. Attach as a separate file(s) (i.e. do not embed into another document), preferably a JPEG. IMPORTANT: In separate document provide: * caption or explanations of the photos; * the photographer’s name if possible; * assurance that subjects have given their consent, both for the photograph to be taken and for its possible use in learning/publicity materials. Most recently approved In word or excel format. Please label it “CSCF (ref no.)

Logframe and Activity Log MOST RECENT LOGFRAME”. External evaluation report Please label it “CSCF [ref no] final evaluation report”. Guidance for commissioning a final independent external evaluation is available at : https://www.gov.uk/civil- society-challenge-fund

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 2

3. Financial Report – Use the most recent Excel template available on DFID’s CSCF website. Guidance notes can be found on the first worksheet (tab) of the workbook (file).

Mark Document Notes with an “X” Final annual financial report Worksheets 2 and 3 of excel template showing expenditure over 2013/14 and explanation of variance Financial summary Worksheets 4 and 5 of excel template giving a summary of expenditure over the life of your project and an explanation of variance

It is very important to note that:

 project expenditure must be reported against the full budget agreed by Fund Manager and not the summary budget used for expenditure claims  any variances in excess of 10%, either positive or negative, (or transfers between main budget-sub-headings) must be explained; and  you should show any variances both in terms of total amount in GBP (£) and percentage of your budget.

4. Closure Documents

Mark Document Notes with an “X” Final claim or statement of If you claim in advance, you will need to fill in a expenditure statement of expenditure as part of your closure process. If you claim in arrears, please only ensure we have your final claim Inventory of disposal of This should list all assets purchased under the project assets and which are about to be transferred to the beneficiary organisation. This must be signed by both the grant holder and the asset benefitting organisation. Asset transfer letter This must be signed by both the grant holder and the asset benefitting organisation. Annual Audited Accounts (if A hard copy of your Annual Audited Accounts for the available – see note) financial year in which your project ended must be posted to us four months after the end of your financial year

If you have any questions about the completion of your annual reporting requirements, please contact Triple Line Consulting Ltd at [email protected] or on 020 8788 4672.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 3

CSCF PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT SECTION 1: BASIC INFORMATION This information is needed to update the fund manager’s records 1.1 UK Organisation Name Traidcraft Exchange 1.2 UK Organisation Address Traidcraft Exchange, Kingsway, Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, NE11 ONE; 1.3 Project partner(s) Please include Christian Partners Development Agency all partners. Provide approximate dates where partners changed mid- project. For multi-country projects please indicate which partner is in which country 1.4 Project Title A Faircup – Ensuring the rights of small holder tea farmers 1.5 CSCF Number CSCF 0556 1.6 Country/ies Kenya 1.7 Location within Country/ies Nyeri and Kirinyaga Counties of Central Kenya 1.8 Project Start & End Dates Start: April 2011 End: March 2015 1.9 Total project budget £430,453 1.10 Total funding received from £409,801 DFID 1.11 Financial contributions from Total £20,652 other sources Please state the List all contributions amounts and sources of funding for £3,000 (WF South Trust) this project e.g. £75,000 (ABC £1,476 (Dorfred Charitable Trust) Foundation) £1,200 (N. Smith Charitable settlement) £250 (Samuel story Charitable Trust) £1,000 (Gateway World Shop) £2,000 (Carol E Farrer) £125 (St Patrick’s Primary School) £142 (Traidcraft Exchange) £2000 (Gateway Development Trust) £7000 (LD Rope Charitable Trust) £3000 (W F Southall) 1.12 Date report produced 30th June 2015 1.13 Name and position of Name: SAMMY BUNYALI person(s) who compiled this Position: PROJECT MANAGER, CPDA report Name: Yohannes Tesfamichael Position: Regional Director East Africa, Traidcraft

Name: Position: 1.14 Name, position & email Name: Yohannes Tesfamichael address for the main contact Position: Regional Director East Africa, Traidcraft person for correspondence Exchange relating to this project Email 1: [email protected] Email 2: [email protected] 1.15 Secondary contact person Name: Charlotte Timson (optional) Position: Director of International Programmes & Policy Email 1: [email protected] Email 2: [email protected] 1.16 Acronyms Try not to use CPDA – Christian Partners Development Agency acronyms but if you do, please list TX – Traidcraft Exchange CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 4 them here FUM – Factory Unit Manager FSC – Field Services Co-ordinator TESA – Tea Extension Services Assistant KTDA- Kenya Tea Development Agency FGD – Focused Group Discussion CCs – Collection Centres for green leaf CCCs – Collection Centre Committees LSPs – Local Service Providers

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 5

SECTION 2: PROGRESS AND RESULTS (Aim for no more than 3 pages) 2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY (200 words) In your own words please describe the aims of your project. Fair Cup is a project aimed at empowering 26,729 smallholder tea farmers associated to four KTDA managed tea factories in Central Kenya namely Gitugi, Iriani, Chinga and Ndima.

For a long time, smallholder tea farmers have continued to grow tea, deliver to the factories and wait for whatever income will be declared by the factories, without sufficient understanding of what their rights are as shareholders of the factories. This subjects them to prices that they are not in control of as they do not participate in determining the market as it is ceded to brokers at the auction.

Although there have been efforts by the government to address the farmers’ rights through legislation of the Tea Act and other laws, farmers’ awareness on the Tea Act and relevant laws remains low.

This project therefore aimed at enhancing farmers’ awareness of their rights in piloted locations in Kenya as provided for under the Tea Act and other relevant laws of Kenya. Further, this project sought to support the farmers practice their rights by strengthening the capacity of their representatives (collection centre committee members and board of directors) to execute their roles and responsibilities as representatives of the farmers effectively. It also aims to enhance the lobbying skills of the farmers’ representatives so that they can effectively articulate farmers’ issues with the factory management. The project also worked with the factory management so that they are more responsive to issues farmers raise, demonstrate openness and accountability towards farmers. Finally, the project supported farmers to diversify their source of income so that they are not dependent on tea only as their source of livelihood.

2.2 PROGRESS SINCE THE PERIOD COVERED BY THE LAST ANNUAL REPORT Please outline (maximum 10 lines): Any significant progress: The project had first intended to work with six factories in three Counties of Murang’a, Nyeri and Kirinyaga. However, this was scaled down to four factories in Nyeri and Kirinyaga Counties though that did not reduce the total number of targeted farmers significantly. At the time of last annual reporting (Year 3) progress with the fourth factory had been slow due to the politics surrounding the Kirinyaga County. However, great progress was made during the final year, whereby the Ndima factory management accepted the project and key activities were carried out involving the factory management, the Directors and Tea Extension Staff. Joint planning of activities with farmers was carried out with factory management and extension teams and subsequently all the tea Collection Centre Committees were trained as well as the farmers. A gender survey was also conducted in the final year of the project, whose findings were disseminated to all the management teams of the four factories and directors of a factory for follow up on the key action points. Revised training posters on rights and responsibilities were produced and disseminated to all the farmers within the catchment of the four factories, farmers’ representatives, directors and factories. This was seen as a sustainability measure in articulation of rights since it will help farmers refresh their understanding of their rights continuously for some years to come. Other stakeholders can also use the posters for similar training. Collection center committee training and reference manual was also produced for use by existing and newly elected committee members in future. Local Service providers were also trained as Trainers of trainers (ToTs).

Any significant challenges: No significant challenge was encountered that is insurmountable since the last reporting. As reported in the past sometimes getting directors for a workshop was sometimes a challenge though not to a level that hampers project progress. Once the project was fully accepted by all stakeholders and significant progress was witnessed farmers and factory management wanted the project to continue for a little longer indicating the high relevance of the project. In addition since the resources allocated for supporting farmers to

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 6

improve their non-tea enterprises was low compared to other outputs by weight what the project could offer was limited though significant achievement was realised using the available limited resources.

What are the dates of this April 2014 to March 2015 final period? 2.3 CHANGES TO PROJECT STATUS In the last reporting period has the project made any changes? Read the statements below and mark with an “X” in the appropriate boxes. (a) project design and logframe No (b) partner(s) No (c) context Yes Provide a brief explanation: Due to some challenges experienced in financial management and reporting of the project Traidcraft took an enhanced role in managing the finances of the project in the last year in consultation with Tripleline.

2.4 KEY RESULTS AND EFFECTIVENESS FROM OUTSET OF PROJECT Please provide a summary of the project’s three most significant results achieved over the project as a whole. This is an opportunity to tell the story of the project’s success. Describe the most important changes the project has brought about; which target groups and how many citizens benefited (men/women; girls/boys); who they are and how they benefited. Also make it clear where the results were achieved in coalition or partnership with others. 1. The project was the first of its kind in raising tea farmers’ and other stakeholders’ awareness of tea farmers’ rights. As a result 26,729 small scale tea farmers under four factory catchment areas (Gitugi, Iriani, Chinga and Ndima tea factories) can clearly articulate their rights as well as practice them. This is evident from the increased engagement between the farmers and their representatives on key issues of concern.

2.Tea Buying Centre Committee members are now more skilled in articulating farmers’ issues and lobbying on behalf of the farmers in relevant forums including at factory meetings. This is evident from the orderly manner in which the meetings are being conducted and minutes of the deliberations which indicate discussions about farmers’ issues.

3. Significant improvement was registered in the communication between farmers, farmer representatives and factory management in addressing issues raised by farmers. As a result factories are more responsive to the issues raised by farmers. This is evident from the actions taken on various issues of concern that have been raised by the farmers. As a pilot the project has successfully set the ground for other factories to emulate the lessons learned from the project.

2.5 PROJECT BENEFICIARIES State the number of people who have benefitted from the project, disaggregating where possible and drawing on the figures you supply in Annex A. Ensure that you avoid double counting. Gender and Age Disaggregation Adult OVERALL Adult Male Child Male Child Female Female (18 years +) (< 18 yrs) (< 18 yrs) TOTAL (18 years +) Consolidated total number of 26,729 16,037 10,692 0 0 beneficiaries reached by project Indicate or estimate the percentage or number of disabled beneficiaries reached by the project:

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 7

The number of disabled in less than 0.5% considering the nature of interventions – working with tea farmers majority of whom have to be fit to work on the farms. Provide a clear description of your Describe how they have benefitted from beneficiaries (e.g. people living with HIV/AIDS; the project disabled children; soapstone workers; child labourers) 1. Tea farmers Increase in awareness on their rights (knowledge and practice) 2. Tea Collections Centre Committee Enhanced skills in representation of farmers members at the factory level. 3. Tea Extension Assistants (factory staff) Enhanced awareness on the rights of the farmers 4. Factory Management Improved awareness on the rights of the farmers as well as improvement in quality of the meetings with farmers’ representatives (brief and more focused meetings have been reported as a result of training of farmers’ representatives. 5. Factory Board of Directors Awareness of the rights of famers as well their responsibilities as farmers representatives. 6. Local service providers Awareness in farmers’ rights as well as training skills to support farmers better. 7. Did the target group/beneficiaries change from what was envisaged in the proposal and if so, why? The target group did not change.

The collection of gender disaggregated data is one step in gender mainstreaming, and an important way of reaching female beneficiaries is to have female project staff. What % of your project staff is female? Total of 4 female and 2 male thus female project staff comprising of 67% of total.

Executive Director – Female Project Accountant – Female Project Manager – Male Field Co-ordinator – Female Project Trainer – Female Driver – Male

Please explain if the project is unable to: (a) specify all beneficiaries: No (b) provide exact beneficiary numbers: No (c) disaggregate beneficiaries by gender, age or disability: No 2.6 EQUITY Has this project contributed to increased equity (poverty reduction; empowerment of marginalised groups to participate in decisions that affect them at local and national level)? (Mark with an “X” in the appropriate box). Yes Yes No To some extent: Please explain your response: The project has contributed to increased equity. Through enhanced awareness on the rights of the farmers in the tea sector, the farmers have been able to realize a fair return on their investments by holding the factories accountable to them on various aspects such as increasing efficiency on logistics, reducing energy costs, and generally more prudent management of their investment. Through capacity building on diversification, the project has also enabled farmers to CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 8

identify or improve their non-tea enterprises so as to enhance their incomes and be less dependent of tea. Through enhanced capacity of the farmer representatives, they are able to participate more effectively in factory meetings thus influencing decisions. Also by ensuring that the farmers elect good leaders (leaders who are more skilled and transparent), the farmers ensure better management of the factory. Some of the board members elected at the local level, represent farmers at the National level – an example is the that the National Chairman of the Kenya Tea Development Authority (National) is a Director elected by farmers at Chinga Tea factory.

2.7 ARE THERE MULTIPLIER EFFECTS FROM THIS PROJECT? i.e. was the project able to leverage more funds? Have you been able to reach more target groups than anticipated? (Mark with an “X” in the appropriate box) Yes Yes No To some extent: If yes or to some extent, please explain: By jointly planning for activities with the factories, the project was able to leverage on factory resources during joint activities such as training of farmers. The factory staff also gave their technical support to the capacity building sessions for the project. The project was not able to leverage more funds for this period. However learning from the achievements of the project, Traidcraft is intending to replicate the project in other parts of the country. In addition, learning from the acceptance the beneficiaries showed to the support they received from the project to diversify their income through non-tea enterprises, Traidcraft is now developing an enterprise support based income diversification project in part of the existing Fair Cup project target areas.

2.8 OUTCOME AND OUTPUT SCORE What overall performance rating has the project evaluation awarded your project? A+ Please indicate the overall performance score (C – A++) in the box to the right. 2.9 EVALUATION RECOMMENDATIONS (please list in the table below) Evaluation Recommendations Your Response Traidcraft should explore possibilities of Tea supply chain is one of the three main embarking on a second or further phase of sectors Traidcraft Exchange works in East the project within the same areas with the Africa. As such we are in constant following objectives in mind: discussions with relevant partners on ways a) to consolidate the positive changes that we can scale up achievements of Fair Cup have occurred in the farmers’ levels of project as well as develop new projects. awareness, confidence and in asserting their interests, thereby enhancing the Last year Traidcraft worked with one of the sustainability of the project outputs; factories which participated in the project to b) to provide capacity support for farmers develop a sizable project to support tea 1. to improve their income through non-tea farmers in one factory interested in growing farming activities, and to explore the their beekeeping business. Though we were question of access to markets as a way not successful to raise funds for the project to enhance sustainability; we are now working to seek funds to c) to guide and monitor factory implement the project. management on incorporating the gender study in management of the tea sector in a way that diminishes the disadvantages faced by women farmers or women farm workers.

In addition to the manuals on leadership Traidcraft developed and supplied factory and management for training collection management with printed copies of the centre committees handed to the factory Collection Center Committees training and management for support in further training reference manual for use to strengthen 2. of subsequent committees, Traidcraft existing and newly elected members. should invest in additional simplified materials (such as posters) and booklets specifically for the farmers’ collection centre committees, which summarise key CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 9

principles, important practices of leadership and management and in accountability in a way that is easily accessible to the farmers.

The project should consider in subsequent This clearly shows the significant relevance of phases investing in negotiation and the project just completed and its positive advocacy skills-building among collection impact. Traidcraft is keen to continuously look centre committee members and farmers. for ways to support farmers which have This will enhance the efforts towards benefited from Fair Cup project as long as we greater accountability from the factory manage to raise sufficient resources for new 3. management and boards of directors, better projects. representation of farmers’ interests and concerns, and more effective handling of discussions on difficult or contentious issues.

Traidcraft should documenting the process This is well received. Traidcraft organised a of moving from resistance to support in final evaluation dissemination workshop at implementing initiatives aimed at the end of the project to share lessons from empowering farmers in a context of difficult the project as well as learn from views of relations between farmers and their factory stakeholders on the impact of the project. We 4. management. There are rich lessons will use this lessons to inform our future work emerging including the process of making on rights issues in tea supply chain. training in “rights” acceptable in a context that was originally averse to the idea.

5. 2.10 MANAGEMENT RESPONSE TO THE EVALUATION (Mark with an “X” in the appropriate box) Do you consider the independent evaluation a fair reflection Yes No To some extent of your projects achievements and challenges in terms of: (a) the score X (b) the narrative X Please explain briefly: The independent evaluation largely confirmed what we were seeing though the regular monitoring of the project. In addition it provided a rich qualitati9ve analysis of farmers and other stakeholders experience’s with the project.

SECTION 3: RISK ASSESSMENT (Aim for no more than ½ page). Please report on the top five risks only 3.1 Risks identified in Did the risk If the risk materialised, If the risk did not the original proposal materialise? – how did the project deal materialise, was this as a and in annual Yes/No with it and reduce the result of measures put into reports impact on the project? place by the project? If yes, please explain how. 1. Non The project involved the cooperation Yes, to an Factory Unit Managers by Tea factory extent. and the Field Services management Initially some Co-ordinators in and KTDA factory planning for project management activities, which really members enhanced working proved relations with factory difficult to management. Once they work with. saw the positive impact of the project their

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 10

collaboration with the project improved significantly.

2. Farmers No, it didn’t The project involved all The project run entry decline to materialize stakeholders - including meetings with the participate in though the factory management, farmers in collaboration the project sometimes farmers and their with factory farmers representatives and this management. depended on enhanced ownership of the factories the project interventions. to coordinate their participation 3. Decrease in Since it is beyond the export tea Indeed due projects scope to prices (high to global influence this the project impact, low market worked with factory probability). challenges management to support tea prices fell farmers to engage in down few and improve their non- times. tea enterprises to increase their income 4. Non- No, partner The approach used by cooperation staff Traidcraft was from staff to generally participatory so that participate in were willing partner staff see the training and to need to address certain mentorship collaborate gaps and willingly in identifying commit to any capacity interventions. gaps and agree ways of addressing the gap.

5. Victimization The projects approach of farmers was that we empower who will be farmers to understand demanding for and exercise their rights their rights. while at the same times No, this was encourage them to do not observed their responsibilities. In during the addition we were also duration of engaging factory the project. management transparently so that they understand issues raised by farmers are within their rights

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 11

SECTION 4: VALUE FOR MONEY (Aim for no more than 1 page) For guidance and resources on VfM please see ‘DFID’s approach to Value for Money' published July 2011 at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67479/DFID-approach- value-money.pdf: Also see ‘Value for Money: What it means for NGOs’; and ‘Integrating Value for Money into other Programme Cycle’ available on the Bond website: http://www.bond.org.uk/effectiveness/value-for- money 4.1 ECONOMY What has the project management done this year to buy and employ inputs at a value-for-money price? (DFID considers inputs to include: staff, consultants, raw materials and capital to produce outputs) Simply put, what did your organisation do to drive down unit costs but maintain quality? Explain and provide examples: All procurement of goods and services continued to be guided by the procurement policies in terms of quality, cost effectiveness and competitiveness. Foe example where appropriate the project used existing resources within factories to train farmers; trips to the field was coordinated to avoid duplication; competitive bidding was used for any procurement to ensure quality and cost.

4.2 EFFICIENCY How do you ensure resources (inputs) were used efficiently to maximise results (outputs)? Explain and provide examples: All resources continued to be allocated optimally in order to maximize usage. Leveraging on partners’ resources was done through joint planning and execution of activities. The project management team met every quarter to review progress as well as map out action plan for the following quarter to ensure activities are planned and executed efficiently in line with the project deliverables for the quarter. To implement agreed action plans project personnel are allocated responsibilities which they are accountable for every month. This ensures that staff time and resources are used appropriately. Further, staff report against the outputs on a regular basis (monthly).

4.3 EFFECTIVENESS How do you consider this project to be effective in bringing about the anticipated changes for beneficiaries and target groups? How well did the outputs of the project achieve the intended outcomes? Explain why: It is indeed evident that the project is realizing the intended outcomes as a result of the outputs generated out of the interventions/activities to a great extent. This can be seen in the obvious transformation of the farmers in terms of the way they conduct their business and the quality of interaction with the factories. The factory management even acknowledges the impact the project has had on their engagement with farmers and their representatives. From project management perspective also it is effective. For example TORs are developed for each training activity based on the expected result for the relevant period. This is then evaluated at the end of the training in order to gauge the perceptions of the participants about the effectiveness and usefulness of the training. According to the information collected through regular monitoring, it is evident that the interventions are effective as the desired changes are now evident, for example, in terms of farmers’ awareness about the issues of their concern and how they present their case to factory management, farmer representatives’ capacity to lobby on behalf of farmers and the way they now deal with factory management and even on the responsiveness of factory management to issues farmers raise.

SECTION 5: SUSTAINABILITY(Aim for no more than ½ page) 5.1 What efforts have you made to ensure the project is sustainable beyond CSCF funding? The project identified and trained Local Service Providers (local community members who are also tea farmers). They were used as Trainers of Trainers (ToTs) during the training of farmers and since they are based in the community, they will be useful in sustaining the benefits of the project by supporting farmers on how to exercise their rights. Training posters on rights and responsibilities were also done and disseminated to all tea farmers so that farmers can paste them on the walls of houses to remind them about their rights. A well designed and printed Collection center committee members training and reference manual was also distributed to all CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 12

factory management so that they can support existing and newly elected members in future. The gender survey report findings and recommendations was disseminated to all the four factory management teams as well as a section of the factory directors. It is hoped that through this they will be able to pursue the recommendations.

5.2 Which elements rely on continued funding? The component on non-tea enterprises is one that did not receive much allocation in terms of resources in this project yet it has been proven that economic empowerment is critical to demand of rights. This is no doubt an area in need of more support in future.

Have you secured future funding? Work in 5.3 Yes No No (Mark with an “X” in the appropriate box) progress

SECTION 6: LESSONS (Aim for no more than 2 pages) Please note you do not have to provide lessons under each area. Try to draw lessons that might be useful for other CSCF projects. Try to avoid presenting obvious lessons (e.g. “the participation of women in project activities is key to their empowerment”). 6.1 APPROACHES TO EMPOWERMENT AND ADVOCACY a) What have you learnt about strategies to facilitate empowerment in relation to i) service delivery (quality and access); ii) political participation; iii) economic participation and iv) household decision-making? A very significant learning on approaches is the importance of involving all actors in all the stages of the project right from planning, implementing through to monitoring and review. This greatly enhances the ownership of interventions, as well as results, thus greater chances of successful execution of the actions since they have been mutually agreed upon during planning. In addition, the involvement of both the rights bearers and rights holders appropriately in the project makes the realisation of the rights of disadvantaged groups much easier as it minimizes antagonism between them.

b) If something has worked particularly well, why? How has this learning been applied in your project? The need to engage with all project stakeholders is critical for the success of the project. To do this continuous communication about project progress helps to develop a shared understanding of success factors on the project. Learning from the reasons for slow start of the project and challenges experienced from some factory management staff the project team flexibly reviewed project activity planning processes to include factory staff and ensured that project progress is regularly communicated. This helped in minimising any misunderstanding and delays in the project. It also helped in developing open mindedness for learning among project stakeholders.

6.2 EQUITY AND GENDER EQUALITY (a) What lessons have you learned regarding strategies to engage marginalised and excluded groups, including women in project activities or benefits, to reduce their poverty or empower them to participate in decisions that affect them at local and national levels? Strategies for the inclusion of women in project activities have got to be sensitive to the fact that the women are already so burdened with their daily chores. Further, for agricultural activities, it is the women who predominantly work the farms thus their involvement in project activities has to be sensitive to the community calendar. If you call farmers for project activities during the peak tea collection season time, participation is compromised since they are busy on the farms. Secondly, economic empowerment is a major cornerstone to women’s participation in leadership. It is quite evident from the current leadership among farmers that any woman who vies for leadership will most often be a woman who is economically well to do as this usually makes them more confident and assertive.

(b) Have you learned any useful lessons in understanding and addressing gender inequality (e.g. in the difference between men and women in access to services, decision making, control of resources etc.)? CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 13

In order to address gender inequality, the whole issue of access to and control of resources plus the power to make decisions on resource allocation needs to be understood properly. However, in the tea sector land is the main resource where ownership is with the men regardless of who works on it. Unfortunately, matters of the land tenure system are deeply embedded in the culture of the community where land is not ordinarily owned by women. However, through continuous sensitization, some men have started to sub-divide the tea bushes and register some under the women’s names so that they can have access to the proceeds but also giving them an opportunity to vie for leadership since it is a requirement that anyone seeking leadership should be a registered tea farmer. This has created an opportunity for more women to vie and be elected into decision making committees.

(c) What has worked particularly well and why?

Diversification of sources of income for the women has proved really effective in making the farmers less dependent on tea thus less vulnerable to shocks in the tea sector. In addition since it is difficult for women to own land the project team ensured that intervention on non-tea enterprise support is mainly focused on women as much as possible. They are also more assertive in claiming for their rights as a result of this. Ceding of some part of the tea acreage to the women is also increasing their chances on gaining leadership positions in the sector and this is a positive thing considering that it is the women who provide the most labour.

(d) If something has not worked well, why was this? How has this learning been applied in your project?

N/A 6.3 CAPACITY BUILDING: (a) Which approaches to building the capacity of local partners and community groups have been most successful? The use of Local Service Providers in mobilization and capacity building proved to be very effective. This is because the LSPs easily connect with the farmers since they are also tea farmers like them, they are affected by the same issues and circumstances. This is also very critical in sustainability since the LSPs remain in the community with all the knowledge gained through the capacity building interventions from the project. In terms of capacity building for local partner the key lesson was the importance of mutual respect as partners based on genuine commitment to achieve stated project objectives. Once such genuine commitment was achieved Traidcraft carried out regular capacity assessment of project staff using quarterly project reports and project progress as a measure. Based on mutual assessment appropriate in house workshops and coaching arrangements were put in place to support project staff to develop the necessary skills.

(b) Have you had a successful capacity building approach that helped women/girls take a leadership role and/or gain access to resources or control over decision-making where they had none before? As mentioned above when it was clear that majority of women are unable to own land to grow tea the project team tried its best to ensure support for non-tea enterprises prioritises women. This helped women to increase their participation in decision making at catchment level as well as their chances of being elected for collection center committee membership.

(c) If an approach has not worked well, why was this, and how has this learning been applied in your project? Did you find any solutions? N/A

6.4 MONITORING & EVALUATION (a) What tools and methods have been most useful and practical in measuring and demonstrating evidence of results, including the disaggregation of data (by sex, age, disability)?

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 14

The project logic is well articulated in the project Logical Framework. Data collection has been done using interviews with beneficiaries and data collection questionnaires developed based on the monitoring questions needed to be answered in order to measure progress along the hierarchy within the Log frame. Both have proved very useful with the questionnaires more appropriate where data needed to be collected from a large section of project beneficiaries. In addition workshops with factory management and focus group discussions with farmers and their representatives helped in collecting qualitative monitoring data about their experiences with the project which data difficult t get through quantitative measures.

(b) If something has not worked well, why was this? How has this learning been applied in your project?

Since income from tea is influenced by several factors some of which are outside of the scope of the project sometimes collecting income data from farmers was quite difficult. In addition given that the community generally does not disclose income information it was sometimes difficult for project team to collect income data.

(c) The logframe: Was it a useful tool or did it present challenges? Explain. The Log frame indeed proved very useful in keeping track of the change in the indicators for change. The only challenge presented was that it was quite ambitious in some aspects especially considering the complexity of the tea supply chain. There are such parameters as change in income from tea that are dependent on dynamics not within the control of the project.

6.5 INNOVATION What innovation aspect of the project, were identified in the evaluation?

6.6 OTHER Use the space below if you want to tell us about any other experiences or lessons.

SECTION 7: PROJECT ACCOUNTABILITY TO STAKEHOLDERS (Aim for no more than 1 page) 7.1 In the space below provide a short description/case-study of beneficiary feedback processes in action in your project. We also welcome examples where this experience was problematic or challenging. Please describe: (a) the method the project used to collect feedback from beneficiaries Feedback from beneficiaries was generated in various ways. This include evaluation at the end of every training activity, during monitoring data collection every quarter. In addition farmers and their representatives were also invited to attend the final dissemination workshop to hear their views on their experiences with the project.

(b) how/who analysed the feedback This information was synthesized by the whole project team with support from Traidcraft during Project Management Team meetings and other planning and review meetings.

(c) issues raised by feedback important issues raised included: The farmers felt the trainings were very useful only that they impacted on their farming activities which they carry out on a day to day basis. They therefore expected to be compensated if they are expected to be away from their daily activities for long. Feedback from farmers was also shared back with factory management for action during different forums.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 15

(d) action taken (or not) to address the issues Activities were consequently organized with the farmers schedule in mind – especially the peak and off peak season in tea production. Off peak was used to have activities that involve farmers more since the production on the farms was low. In order to keep the factory management in the picture of everything, joint planning sessions were carried out and implementation synchronized with the schedule of the factory extension staff. The project team confirmed that factory management teams to a large extent were responsive to farmers’ feedback and most of the time acted on farmers’ feedback.

(e) feedback to beneficiaries on what was done (or not). The feedback to farmers was usually communicated by the factory via farmer representatives or during quarterly meetings between factory management and farmer representatives. Where the factory acted on the feedback factory management will confirm to farmers. Where only explanation is required the factory management also took steps to help farmers’ understand the issues surrounding their feedback.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 16

ANNEX A: OUTCOME AND OUTPUT SCORING

PLEASE READ THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THIS PAGE CAREFULLY AND COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS

SCORING ANNEX A asks you to score performance against your Outcome and Outputs (Purpose and Outputs), making a judgement on the actual achievement of expected results. Use the five-point scoring system to rate your achievement of results.

 Under outcomes and outputs, list all indicators from your most recently approved logframe.  Clearly state the achievement against the indicator target focusing on results. Do not simply describe activities.  Back up statements of progress/achievements with references to evidence that can be checked if necessary.

Score Description of Score A++ Output/outcome substantially exceeded expectation A+ Output/outcome moderately exceeded expectation A Output/outcome met expectation B Output/outcome moderately did not meet expectation C Output/outcome substantially did not meet expectation

BENEFICIARY DATA ANNEX A also asks you to provide disaggregated beneficiary data against outcomes and outputs. Note that section 2.5 of the PCR asks you to record total consolidated beneficiary numbers without double counting.

Who is a beneficiary? Everyone who comes into contact with the project who is potentially changed as a result, e.g. through awareness-raising; skill development; raised income; knowledge of rights / obligations.

For example, a project working to raise awareness of deaf children’s rights and improve provision for them has many beneficiaries:  deaf children - who are now receiving the support  their parents - who now realise the value and potential of their deaf children  government officials - who now understand that deaf children have the right to attend school  teachers - who have been trained in sign language and now know that deaf children can be taught and can learn

EVIDENCE Evidence could include: sample survey findings; case studies; analysed monitoring reports; project records; government statistics. Please cite your evidence sources as specifically as possible.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 17

ANNEX A - OUTCOME AND OUTPUT SCORING (Aim for no more than 6 pages) Retain in portrait format

OUTCOME A.0.1 Outcome: write in full your project outcome(s) in the box below Increased incomes for 26,729 tea farming households in the catchment areas of the four targeted tea factories through their increased capacity to demand their rights under the revised Tea Act, other applicable laws and through diversifying their sources of income.

A.0.2 Outcome Score: Please provide an overall outcome score (C – A++) A

A.0.3 Write in full each outcome indicator, the milestone, and state progress Explain any over or under achievement. Outcome indicator 1: % increase in the average income from tea for tea farming households in the catchment areas of four targeted tea factories

Milestone: 20% - (15,400/=)

Result: An analysis of how the factories have performed over the project period indicates an increase in the tea production by the farmers as evidenced by the total green leaf produced per factory. For example Iriaini tea factory has moved from processing 11,219,673 Kgs of green leaf in 2011 to 15,726,093 in 2014. Chinga tea factory moved from 12,163,865 in 2011 to 18,165,334 in 2014. Ndima moved from 12,375,657 Kgs in 2011 to 19,178,655 in 2014. Gitugi moved from 8,910,959 in 2011 to 12,914,943 in 2013. This can be attributed to various actions taken by the factories in response to the concerns of farmers. In both Ndima and Chinga, the withering area was expended in order to accommodate more tea thus increasing the crushing capacity. Farmers were therefore able to pluck their tea more frequently thus delivering more kilograms. Prudent cost management systems on energy were also instituted by both Gitugi and Iriaini. This should ordinarily have translated into increased returns from tea. However, tea earnings for all farmers in the tea sector plummeted partly due to market glut and partly due to the dynamics of the international market which resulted in lowering of the price of tea on the market for the current reporting period. Generally there was a declining trend on income from tea for tea farmers in the country not only those in the project area over the project life. In July 2015 the government is expected to publish income for the period July 2014 to June 2015.

Outcome indicator 2: Number of significant issues raised by tea farmer representatives, per factory, that have been dealt with by the targeted four tea factories to the satisfaction of the tea farmers.

Milestone: At least 5 (segregated per factory)

Result: The significance of issues raised and dealt with varies from factory to factory and from farmer to farmer since depending on several factors farmers’ attention is focused on issues that affect them. Nevertheless given the enhanced responsiveness of factory management towards issues raised by farmers all issues were reasonably dealt with.

In Gitugi the significant issues fir farmers were late collection, wrong weight entries, underweight fertilizers, inaccurate weighing scales and poor PR by clerks. The factory dealt with all the issues case by case.

In Chinga the significant issues that were dealt with effectively were Long distance covered by some farmers and congestions in collection center, representation of farmers in mobile/ satellite buying centres, poor roads, late collection of leaf, signing of supply contracts to farmers, late issuance of registration numbers to new farmers. CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 18

In Iriaini the significant issues addressed were query of poor prices, late green leaf collection, late issuance of fertilizers, inaccurate weighing scales,

In Ndima the significant issues addressed were Late collection of green leaf, uneven distribution of fertilizers, late supply of fertilizers, delay in registration of new growers, underweight fertilizers,

Overall the factory management demonstrated high level of responsiveness to deal with issues raised by farmers.

Outcome indicator 3: % and number of tea farmers, (from those supported to diversify their incomes and take concrete steps to improve their business) who report an increase in income from their non tea enterprise

Milestones: 75% (562 out of 750) who took concrete action to improve their enterprise)

Result: 51% or 520 farmers out of 1020 who were supported took concrete actions to improve their non-tea enterprises. Out of the 520 a total of 334 farmers (65%) have reported getting increased income. First they were able to report an increase in yields, then they were able to collectively sell their produce to better markets thus getting a better price for their various commodities. However since some businesses especially those based on agricultural products which need long time to mature take time to generate expected income slightly lower than expected percentage of farmers reported an increase in income at the reporting time.

A.0.4 Disaggregate the number of citizens benefitting from this outcome; describe briefly who they were and how they benefitted NB. Adult =18 years and above; Child =below 18 years. Adult Adult Child Child Brief description Change/improvement Total Male Female Male Female (e.g. farmers) (e.g. income increased) Tea farmers in the Tea farmers supported to 16,037 10,692 0 0 26,729 four factories improve production Tea farmers Improved yields 224 796 0 0 1,020 supported in non-tea Collective marketing enterprises Access to better markets

A.0.5 State the evidence that supports progress described Farmers’ group records indicate collective marketing of commodities as well as increased income to members. Project records have also captured data indicating this.

OUTPUT 1 A.1.1 Write Output in full Smallholder tea farmers, tea factory management & directors have increased awareness of farmers rights under the revised Tea Act A.1.2 Output score (C – A++) A A.1.3 Write in full each output indicator, the relevant milestone, and state progress

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 19

Output indicator 1.1 % and number of farmers, disaggregated by gender, that can clearly state their rights under the revised Tea Act and applicable laws (freely & fairly elected officials, access to information, services, inputs, and choice of where to market their tea)

Milestone: 90% of 26,729 farmers by end of project

Result: By the end of the project in March 2015 all the targeted tea farmers of 26,729 farmers from four factories namely Gitugi, Iriani, Chinga and Ndima Tea Factories were trained on their rights and responsibilities as per the project design. A sample of 20% out of the total farmers reached was taken for monitoring of articulation of rights by farmers. The result shows that a total of 90.7% (comprising 33% women out of the total and 57.7% men) of the farmers sampled can clearly state from one to five rights out of the nine sets of rights and responsibilities they were trained on. Though all sampled farmers mention all the rights they were trained on, the emphasis clearly was based on each farmer’s focus of interest. A further analysis indicates that more farmers state the rights that directly impact on their production and income following the training that they received through the project. A breakdown of this proportion shows that the highest number of farmers (52.72 %) identify with the right to good quality and affordable inputs which impacts on their productivity, followed by 44.5 % who identify with the right to fair earnings from tea hence showing that they are sensitive to the importance of getting a return on their investment. The right to information at 42.54% and the right to extension services at 31.60%.

The following comparative analysis between the factories sheds more light about farmers’ focus of interest.

In Iriaini Tea Factory the right to good quality and affordable inputs was mentioned by the highest number of farmers (57.67% of the tea famers). This is more likely due to the intervention by the factory to invite the broker from the auction house to come and address the farmers’ representatives during the project training activities regarding tea marketing. During the training the broker informed the farmer representatives that the price of tea at the auction is determined by a number of factors chief among which is the quality of green leaf farmers bring to the factory for processing. Consequently, since then the Iriaini farmers are very keen on the issue of good quality green leaf thus the importance of the issue of inputs.

In Chinga Tea Factory most farmers (68.53%) are keener on the right to good quality and affordable inputs as well. This is largely attributed to the fact that their production per tea bush is actually the lowest among all the three factories. Thus they are keen on improving this aspect through use of quality and affordable inputs by the factory.

In Gitugi Tea Factory the highest number of farmers (51.89%) are keener particularly on the right to fair earnings from tea. This is largely attributed to the fact that the average land size per farmer in Gitugi catchment is smallest among the three factories hence their income stretched to the maximum. Thus the farmers are very keen on fair income from tea since it occupies most of the land that they have.

In Ndima Tea Factory highest number of farmers (57.58%) are keener on the right to information. This can be attributed to the fact that Ndima farmers generally have relatively higher acreage of land (enabling diversification of productive activity and more income). In addition their productivity per tea bush is the highest among the three factories. The implication is that they are more concerned about information regarding their engagement and investment rather than other rights like income and inputs.

Output Indicator 1.2 All tea factory directors, appropriate managers (those who deal with the farmers) and field service teams that can clearly state the rights of smallholder tea farmers under the revised tea act

Progress: 100% of 28 Directors and managers by March 2015

Result: The project team continued to interact with the factory directors, managers and field CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 20

extension teams very closely through various activities throughout the project period including planning interventions, reviewing outcomes and agreeing specific action points following any intervention. The project team held meetings with the factory management teams from the four factories on various aspects of the project. For example there was an initial briefing on the project concept and identification of capacity gaps for both farmers and their representatives. Planning for project activities was then done jointly with the Field Extension managers and their teams. During the training activities, both the managers and directors would attend relevant sessions of training. A number of the training activities for farmer representatives was also designed to cover directors as well. Review meetings held with the directors indicate that consequently all these teams (100%) can clearly articulate the rights of the tea farmer.

A.1.4 Disaggregate the number of citizens reached by this output; describe briefly who they were and how they were engaged. Adult Adult Child Child Brief description (e.g. Nature of engagement Total Male Female Male Female school children) (e.g. safer school environment) Tea farmers Training on rights and 16,037 10,692 26,729 responsibilities Factory managers Designing messages for 3 1 4 posters, planning and reviewing rights training Factory directors Some took part in the 22 1 23 training of farmers TESAs (Tea Training of farmers on 9 3 12 Extension rights and responsibilities Assistants) Local Service Distribute rights posters 6 2 8 providers and training farmers

A.1.5 State evidence that supports the progress described Data on articulation of rights has been collected, from individual farmers as well as focus group discussions, and analysed from a sample taken across the four factories.

A.1.6 Impact weighting (%) (If your project has no impact weighting, leave blank for all outputs). Please insert the impact weighting for this Output (from your logframe) and note any revisions since your last Annual Report. If the rating has changed, please provide an explanation. 30%

OUTPUT 2 A.2.1 Write Output in full Increased capacity of targeted smallholder tea farmers groups to take action to demand their rights A.2.2 Output score (C – A++) A

A.2.3 Write in full each output indicator, the relevant milestone and state progress Output indicator 2.1: Number of farmer representatives (Collection Center Committee members) out of the total that are effectively lobbying on behalf of tea farmers through regular attendance in the meetings with factory board

Milestone: 90% (630/700) of farmer representatives regularly attending and lobbying effectively

Result: Data collected from a sample of 20% of the 639 actual number of tea Collection Centre Committee members at the time of reporting showed that all the committee members were CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 21

actively lobbying on behalf of farmers as is evident from the compilation of issues raised by the farmers, the actions taken by the representatives and the outcome which was always to solve the issues raised to the benefit of the farmer.

The tea Collection Centre Committee members usually have their meetings with the farmers at the CCC level where the farmers articulate their issues of concern. Other issues are raised at individual level by the farmers. The CCC members would then either resolve these issues on the spot or convene a meeting of the CCC so that they deliberate and minute their resolutions/ actions. They also present these issues to the factory on a case by case basis or during their regular meetings (quarterly in most cases) with the factory management. All the CCC members (100%) attend the meetings with factory management and board without fail as indicated by factory records.

Output indicator 2.2: Number of issues from the eight sets of key tea farmer rights that were discussed in each of the factory board meeting, disaggregated by factory, out of those raised by farmer representatives

Milestone: At least one issue from each of the eight sets of rights (100%)

Result: Compilation of data on each set of rights tackled in each factory indicates that every type of farmer rights was discussed and tackled by factory management in different ways. The CCC members ordinarily raise their issues either directly with their directors, during meetings with their directors or during the AGMs. Going by the records available at the CCC (minute books), their issues are resolved at either levels. Those that require the interventions by the factory management would usually be taken up by the directors and discussed at the board of directors meetings. According to chairman’s report at AGMs and other meetings of the four factories various actions were taken to address issues raised by farmers. Some examples are given below.

In both Ndima and Chinga, farmers’ complaints about long waiting time in the tea buying centres, which the two factories attribute to the low capacity to process green leaf thus scheduling trucks in such a way that allows time to process was solved by investment in expansion of the withering area of the factory. Looking at the significant rise in green leaf processed by the two factories over the four years of the Faircup project, it is quite clear that the lobbying by farmer representatives has had a major impact.

In Iriaini, farmers kept on raising issues to do with infrastructure especially access roads some of which were impassable thus causing delays. This matter was address by the boards through forging a partnership with the Kenya Roads Board for fixing the roads used by factory tracks thereby facilitating the collection and transportation of tea from the collection center to the factory for timely processing.

Outcome indicator 2.3: % of collection centre committee (and other farmer committees) members that are women.

Milestone: At least 30% and number (238 out of 795)

Result: By the end of project time the total number of CCC members was 639 owing to some CCC members who left not being replaced. 179 of these or 28% are women broken down as follows. In Gitugi tea factory 38 out of 162 CCC members (23%); In Iriaini 43 out of 167 members (26%); In Chinga 50 out of 160 CCC members (31%) and in Ndima 48 out of 150 CCC members (32%) are women. Though slightly lower than the representation of women in CCC and other committees has been improving.

A.2.4 Disaggregate the number of citizens reached by this output; describe briefly who they were and how they were engaged. Nature of engagement Adult Adult Child Child Brief description Total (e.g. implementation of Male Female Male Female (e.g. govt officials) existing legislative CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 22

framework)

124 38 0 0 162 Gitugi CCC members Training in leadership 110 50 0 0 160 Chinga CCC members Training in leadership 124 43 0 0 167 Iriaini CCC members Training in leadership 102 48 0 0 150 Ndima CCC members Training in leadership

A.2.5 State the evidence that supports the progress described Project progress report and factory records.

A.2.6 Impact weighting (%) Please insert the impact weighting for this Output (from your logframe) and note any revisions since your last Annual Report. If the rating has changed, please provide an explanation. 25%

OUTPUT 3 A.3.1 Write Output in full Improved governance and management of targeted tea factories ensuring greater accountability to smallholder farmers

A.3.2 Output score (C – A++) B+

A.3.3 Write in full each output indicator, the relevant milestone and state progress Output indicator 3.1 Number of scheduled meetings that take place as agreed between tea factory directors and farmers' representatives

Milestone: Three out of three documented formal meetings per factory (100%)

Result: All the scheduled meetings between factory directors and farmers have continued to take place according to schedule throughout the project period.

Output indicator 3.2 Number of KPIs in each of the four factories' annual targets, disaggregated by factory, that are related to farmer rights

Milestone: 8

Result: Admittedly as also reported during the Quality Assurance Visit organised by DfID, this particular indicator is practically beyond the scope of the project. Therefore the project team was focused on working to enhance responsiveness of factory management towards addressing issues of concern raised by farmers. The factories do indeed take care of farmers issues in the KPIs. However since it proved to be difficult to get information or influence KPIs per se the project focused on assessing the actions taken by the factory management to address farmers’ issues. As confirmed by data collected during continuous monitoring exercises and independent evaluation of the project communication between factory management and farmer representatives improved significantly indicating that farmers are now bolder to demand their rights and factory management continuously being responsive to farmers concerns.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 23

Output indicator 3.3 Proportion of farmers in the four targeted factories, disaggregated by factory, which perceive director elections were democratic and fair according to company policy and in line with national legislation.

Milestone: 80%

Result: Vying for director positions is based on the volume of tea leaves a tea farmer produces for processing by respective factory. This arrangement was reached few years ago after several attempts to come up on a workable practice. The justification for electing farmers with big number of tea bushes is that they will manage the factory with a higher sense of responsibility due the stake they have in the factory. Given the factories are established to make profit and earn income for the tea farmer it requires commensurate capacity in those who manage it. Though this process narrows down the number of farmers that can be elected for director positions farmers still have the chance to elect directors they want. As such elections are procedurally carried out in line with company policy. Perceptions among some farmers may be misleading for the main reason that farmers still don’t appreciate the importance of the current voting system. A majority of farmers over 80% though appreciate that this is the most professional voting system whereby people with a very high stake in the tea sector get elected to the board and are therefore bound to make decisions that are in the best interests of the farmers.

Output indicator 3.4: Mini survey of the challenges and opportunities of women tea farmers in the catchment area of the four target factories completed, findings shared with all four factory management and action taken in line with the recommendations

Milestone: Study findings and recommendations discussed with managers and issues identified for action

Result: The gender mini survey was conducted and its findings and recommendations shared with all factory managements. A workshop attended by all four factory managers and KTDA Foundation Manager was also held where the findings and recommendations was discussed extensively. Managers also set out some of the action points that each factory could undertake to implement the recommendations. The report was also shared with KTDA for future action points. The same report was also disseminated to directors in Gitugi tea factory where action points in a factory specific setting was discussed. It is envisaged that the factories will carry forward the recommendations that no doubt require involvement of major stakeholders in the sector such as government for policy issues, the community themselves in terms of change in attitude and practice, law makers for legislation and the county government too for implementation of gender interventions and the factories themselves. Traidcraft is interested to design a separate project to support selected factories as well as KTDA to implement gender recommendations.

A.3.4 Disaggregate the number of citizens reached by this output; describe briefly who they were and how they were engaged. Adult Adult Child Child Brief description Nature of engagement Total Male Female Male Female (e.g. fisher-folk) (e.g. improved techniques) Factory Dissemination of gender 5 3 0 0 8 management and survey report KTDA Gitugi factory Dissemination of gender 4 1 0 0 5 management and survey report directors

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 24

A.3.5 State the evidence that supports the progress described Project reports and factory records

A.3.6 Impact weighting (%) Please insert the impact weighting for this Output (from your logframe) and note any revisions since your last Annual Report. If the rating has changed, please provide an explanation. 25%

OUTPUT 4 A.4.1 Write Output in full Tea farming households in the targeted tea factory catchment areas generate additional income through diversified enterprise activities A.4.2 Output score (C – A++) B

A.4.3 Write in full each output indicator, the relevant milestone and state progress Output indicator 4.1: Number of farmers, disaggregated by gender and age group, that are supported to initiate or improve their non-tea enterprises

Milestone: 1000 out of 1000 [at least one third of whom are women and half of whom are youth]

Results: A total of 1020 farmers have been supported in different forms to improve their non-tea enterprises including training, exposure visits to successful farmers, linking to buyers, accessing market information etc among others. The total number of farmers supported per factory are as follows:

In Iriaini total supported is 397 (125 men and 272 women) In Gitugi total supported is 264 (96 men and 168 women). In Chinga total supported is 253 (67 men and 186 women) In Ndima total supported is 106 (39 men and 67 women)

Only 97 of the tea farmers supported to improve their non-tea enterprises identified themselves as youth (under the age of 35). It should be noted that due to certain cultural practices many young people marry early which traditionally start to see themselves as adults. For this reason, as observed during focus group discussions, some youth do not feel comfortable to acknowledge themselves as youth. Therefore they don’t disclose their true age.

Output indicator 4.2: Number of farmers, disaggregated by gender and age group, who take concrete steps to improve their business after the support they receive from the project

Milestone: 750 out of 1000 [at least one third of whom are women and half of whom are youth]

Result: All the tea farmers supported indicated that they consider taking action to improve their non-tea enterprises one way or another following the support they received. Out of a 20% sample taken (204 tea farmers) to monitor in what stage the farmers are in taking concrete steps 51% (104 farmers) confirmed that they have taken concrete steps to improve their non-tea enterprises. 78% of those who took concrete steps are women. Some of this concrete steps include using improved variety of crops and products that have high demand in the market (e.g. tree tomatoes, avocado, dairy from goats and cows), responding to buyers preferences (e.g. type of fish they keep in their fish pond or type of feed they use).

A.4.4 The number of citizens reached by this output; describe briefly who they were and how they were engaged.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 25

Nature of engagement Adult Adult Child Child Brief description (e.g. engaging with school Total Male Female Male Female (e.g. parents ) authorities to discuss school performance data) Tea farmers in four Training 224 796 0 0 1020 factories TESA (Tea Briefings to support 9 3 0 0 12 Extension Service farmers Assistants) LSPs (Local Service Briefings to support 6 2 0 0 8 Providers) farmers

A.4.5 State the evidence that supports the progress described Data collected from interviewing tea farmers and some factory records

A.4.6 Impact weighting (%) Please insert the impact weighting for this Output (from your logframe) and note any revisions since your last Annual Report. If the rating has changed, please provide an explanation. 5%

OUTPUT 5 A.5.1 Write Output in full Increase in capacity of local partner CPDA by the end of year 3

A.5.2 Output score (C – A++) B

A.5.3 Write in full each output indicator, the relevant milestone and state progress Output indicator 5.1 % of activities CPDA delivers to the agreed scale

Milestone: 100%

Result: At the beginning of the project the CPDA, as an implementing partner in the project, had some challenges due to project staff not understanding the project concept very well. Traidcraft provided structured and coaching support to strengthen project staff capacity by recruiting an experienced programme management consultant. CPDA also made staffing changes by putting in place an experienced project manager who provided project implementation oversight well. As a result project field staff enhanced their understanding of the project and their commitment to implement project activities as planned. As the project progressed, through various reviews and capacity building, the project picked up very well. The activities have therefore been delivered to the agreed scale. When the implementing partner struggled in some aspect of financial management of the project Traidcraft provided intensive support.

Output indicator 5.2 % of training participants that express overall satisfaction with CPDA training events

Milestone: 90% The project team evaluated each training session for content, relevance, methodology and effectiveness. Based on information gathered at the end of training sessions all farmers find the CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 26

trainings very relevant and effective. The feedback collected from factory management also witnessed the significant improvement in communication and problem solving between farmers and factory management as a result of training provided to farmers and their representatives indicating the relevance and appropriateness of methodology.

Output indicator 5.3: % of project activities delivered within agreed budgets

Milestones: 100%

Result: Apart from the challenges at the beginning where there had been substantial variances between budged and actual spend at the end the project was completed within budget.

A.5.4 Disaggregate the number of citizens reached by this output; describe briefly who they were and how they were engaged. Nature of engagement Adult Adult Child Child Brief description Total (e.g. understand trade Male Female Male Female (e.g. UK public) injustice) CPDA staff Training on data 1 2 0 0 3 collection CPDA staff Training on monitoring 1 2 0 0 3 and review process CPDA staff and Training on performance 1 4 0 0 5 management management CPDA staff and Training on report writing 1 2 0 0 3 management skills CPDA staff and Project financial 1 4 0 0 5 management management 1 3 0 0 4 CDPA staff Accountable partnership

A.5.5 State the evidence that supports the progress described Project reports

A.5.6 Impact weighting (%) Please insert the impact weighting for this Output (from your logframe) and note any revisions since your last Annual Report. If the rating has changed, please provide an explanation. 15%

All outputs in the project logframe must be reported on. If you have more than 5 outputs, please copy and paste additional report sections as needed.

If you require assistance e-mail: [email protected] or call: 020 8788 4672

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 27

ANNEX B: PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS

To be completed by all projects.

DFID aims to compare performance and results across the whole CSCF portfolio therefore it is important that you complete all sections below.

B.1 Contribution to CSCF Objectives Mark the relevant boxes and provide an explanation. Focus on key highlights. Building capacity of Southern civil society to engage in local decision-making X processes Your explanation and comments: The emphasis of the project was to enable farmers realise their rights while at the same time empower their representatives to lobby on behalf of the farmers effectively. Empowered representatives can effectively lobby on behalf of tea farmers to influence decisions that affect farmers’ livelihoods made by factory management. Any improved decision making practice in factories taking part in the project was expected to trickle down to other factories in the region through sharing best practices in appropriate forums. To achieve this objective it was critical to strengthen the capacity of the local partner organisation (CPDA) in order to empower farmers and their representatives to engage in decision making processes at factory, KTDA region and in the tea sector. Traidcraft as a lead partner in the project invested significant amount of time and energy to ensure CPDA acquires and sustains the required capacity to achieve this objective.

Building capacity of Southern civil society to engage in national decision making X processes Your explanation and comments: The tea supply chain covers a wide range of actors and anything that happens in one part of the supply chain affects the rest of actors in the chain one way or another. On the same vein lessons learned from any intervention in any part of the supply chain in the Kenyan context has the potential to inform decision making processes at national level. Fair Cup project was implemented with this premise in mind so that any intervention and lessons from it ultimately informs decision making at a national level through, for example, the involvement of different units of KTDA in the planning, implementation and review of the project. The project supported the local partner CPDA in managing this complex relationships so that it can take forward achievements from this project to higher levels in a way that influences national policies and decisions in the tea supply chain.

Global advocacy

Your explanation and comments:

Innovative service delivery

Your explanation and comments:

Service delivery in difficult environments

Your explanation and comments:

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 28

B.2 Principle Contribution to the Millennium Development Goals Which two goals did the Indicate: Indicate % project contribute to most 1= primary; split between Please provide a brief explanation and how? 2= 2ndary them By enabling farmers to realise their Eradicate extreme poverty 1 75% rights for better incomes to improve and hunger their livelihoods Achieve universal primary

education By supporting women in non-tea enterprises since the land ownership practice does not enable them to own Promote gender equality 1 25% and plan tea. Also by raising and empower women awareness of stakeholders on issues that affect women in the tea supply chain. Reduce child mortality

Improve maternal health

Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria

and other diseases Ensure environmental

sustainability Develop a global partnership for development None of the above

For B3 and B4 for each question as appropriate either mark the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ box; then mark the appropriate box with an ‘X’ using the following scoring for achievement: 1 = none to date, work in progress 2 = low/early indications of achievement 3 = significant/substantial achievement

B.3 Is your project contributing to a change in government policy? Yes No (Mark with an “X” in the appropriate box). If you answer NO, go to Question X B.4. If YES, answer the relevant questions below. What type of change has been achieved to-date? Score your 1- no 2- 3- progr- low / signi- response below. Ensure results are attributable to your project. ess to early ficant date (a) Change in discourse e.g. coalition building; creating space for debate; verbal support for proposed policy change; popular demand for change X emerges from the media/public/coalition advocacy. Provide brief example & indicate evidence: Though the factories try to explain the process to farmers one main area tea farmers are concerned about is how the tea they deliver to factories is actually sold through the auction house. To address this the project worked with the factory management to improve transparency of the tea selling process and factors that affect the price of tea at the auction house. One initiative was factories inviting brokers to come and help farmers understand the entire tea buying-selling process. As such this project created a forum and encouraged openness and transparency from national bodies towards issues that affect farmers. This result has a strong potential to influence national policies that govern how smallholder tea is bought and sold.

(b) Policy development e.g. working group formed; proposed changes/ X principles reflected in draft policies or legislation. CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 29

Provide brief example & indicate evidence: The project carried out a mini study to understand what the challenges and opportunities of women working in the smallholder tea business in the project area are. Traditionally women in the project area have very little opportunity to own farm land. Given that globally 80% of smallholders in Africa are women while they own only 2% of land, this mini study is hoped to help in initiating a debate in the tea sector on how to address some of the challenges women have. For example a workshop was held to debate sentiments women have on what issues they think affects at hem. In addition the report was also submitted to KTDA head office to consider policy review initiatives.

(c) Policy adoption e.g. policies are approved/passed into law; X regulations are passed in support of primary legislation. Name the relevant legislative body; and/or the policies approved/passed into law: See bullet point (a) and (c)

(d) Policy implementation and enforcement e.g. specific policy or X policies are being implemented and enforced as a result of the project. Provide brief example & indicate evidence: See bullet point (a) and (c) (e) Global advocacy e.g. issues debated in global for a.

Provide example: Not applicable to the project at this time.

B.4 Is your project leading or contributing to better practices in Yes No relation to rights and access/quality of services? If you answer X NO, go to question B5; if YES, answer the relevant questions below. 1- no 2- 3- What type of change has been achieved to date? Score your response progr- low / signi- by marking with an “X” in the appropriate box. ess to early ficant date (a) People targeted by the project and others are now aware of their X rights. Provide brief example & indicate evidence: Smallholder tea farmers in project area now have enhanced awareness, knowledge and practice of their rights as provided for in the Revised Tea Act and other related legislation. Farmer representatives now have an enhanced knowledge of their roles and responsibilities as farmer representatives to lobby on behalf of farmers and are better equipped with lobbying and advocacy skills to engage with factory management effectively on behalf of farmers. The project also equipped farmers with visual reference materials to strengthen their understanding of their rights. The project also produced a training material to continuously equip new and existing farmer representatives with the management, leadership, conflict resolution and communication skills so that they continue to lobby fr the rights of farmers.

(b) The voices of marginalised people are heard in local forums. X Provide brief example & indicate evidence: Regular monitoring exercise as well as independent final evaluation of the project confirmed that there is now an open communication between farmers and factory management and an enhanced responsiveness by factory management now towards issues farmers raise directly or through their representatives. Several examples showing issues factory management responded positively to when raised by farmers have been documented throughout the project duration.

(c) People have improved access to services as a result of the project. X

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 30

Provide brief example & indicate evidence: The project was not delivering services per se but the enhanced responsiveness from factory management and stronger capacity observed on their representatives to demand better services and support from the factories on behalf of farmers is an indication that the project has contributed towards improved service delivery for the farmers.

(d) People experience improved quality of services as a result of the X project. Provide brief example & indicate evidence: See bullet point (c) above. (e) Innovative service delivery approaches have been adopted. Provide brief example, explain why innovative: Not directly applicable aspect.

B.5 What are the main methodological approaches used by the project to bring about the changes envisaged? For each selection you make, provide a brief example. Select (a) Rights awareness raising e.g. using rallies, one-to-one communication, media etc. X

Example: The project mobilized smallholder tea farmers and their representatives for training on their rights as provided for in the Kenyan laws and the Tea Act of parliament. It also produced visual adult training materials which farmers can refer to refresh their understanding of their rights. Regular briefings with stakeholders were held about the key issues affecting farmers’ rights, what the project is doing to contribute towards addressing the issues, what role each stakeholder can play. Farmers were taken on exchange visits to well performing farmers especially on additional income generation components to learn applicable best practices.

(b) Working in coalition with other CSO’s X

Example: There was any formal coalition set up as a result or for the project. However Traidcraft worked with a local partner (CPDA) to achieve stated project objectives and collaborated with other local organisations in training farmers about their rights as well as empower their representatives.

(c) Advocacy e.g. advocating publicly for changes in policy and/or practice, X campaigning on specific targeted issues. Example: The project enabled farmers’ representatives through training and other support to lobby on behalf on behalf of farmers. It also produced a collection center committee training and reference material for farmer representatives to continuously develop and refresh their skills.

(d) Modelling e.g. demonstrating best practice / approaches / behaviours which can be

adopted or replicated by others to bring wider improvements in policy or practice. Example: Fair Cup project is the first of its kind in training farmers on what is considered to be a sensitive topic of rights. It was also unique in creating a forum to equip farmer representatives to lobby on behalf of farmers without antagonising another stakeholder. It was piloted in four factories and as was confirmed by the independent evaluation it was a project worth doing as judged by its achievements. In addition the rights’ awareness related activities were done in such a way that farmers and representatives in other factories outside of the project can also replicate the achievement in future for example by using the visual adult training materials on rights and collection center committee training and reference materials.

(e) Policy engagement e.g. building relationships with decision-makers behind the X scenes, to influence improvements in policies/legislation/service delivery.

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 31

Example: Project teams developed a good relationship with KTDA regional and national offices during the implementation of the project so that future work to inform and review policies that can improve livelihoods of farmers.

(f) Service provision in collaboration with government e.g. working with

government to enhance the services already provided through training etc. Example:

(g) Service provision e.g. providing an alternative service which is not provided by the

government. Example:

(h) Monitoring of government policy e.g. monitoring budget-making or enforcement

of rights. Example:

(i) Investigative research and data analysis to hold the government to account X

Example: The mini study on issues affecting women in tea sector to some extent compiled in a report form issues that these women face so that it can be used to contribute to raising government awareness on issues that need action.

(j) Engagement with the media e.g. to develop soap operas, discussions

programmes. Example:

(k) Building the knowledge and skills of marginalised groups to advocate on their

own Example: By identifying and equipping the local service providers (LSPs) from among the community members with the skills they need they are able to lobby and advocate on their own even after the end of the project.

(l) Establishing self-help group

Example: Though the project did not create any new self-help groups the project team collaborated with existing Farmer Field Schools run by factories to support farmers to improve their non-tea enterprises as well as support them to come together to market their produce collectively.

(m) Providing or enabling access to credit/revolving funds

Example:

(n) Training or education curriculum development X

Example: Please see notes on point (d)

(o) If you are using other methodological approaches please note in the box

below Other:

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 32

B.6 Whose capacity (in the main) has been built through the project? (mark with an “X” in the appropriate box) (a) End-beneficiaries (poor and vulnerable groups) X (b) Local leaders / change agents X (c) Local Community-Based Organisations X (d) Civil Society Organisations / Networks X (e) Local government (f) National government (g) Local implementing partner(s) X (h) Trade unions (i) Private sector organisations (j) Other (Please name below)

B.7 Environmental Impact and Climate Change Mitigation How would you describe the project’s environmental impact? (mark with an “X” in the appropriate box) Negative Neutral X Positive Provide a brief justification for choice of ranking: The projects components do not involve activities that impact the environment negatively

Describe actions the project took to reduce negative environmental impact (use bullet points) 

Describe any activities taken by the project to build climate change resilience (use bullet points) 

CSCF Project Completion Report Template 2015 33