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

Talensi-Nabdam was one of the districts in Upper East that split in DISTRICT PROFILE CONTENT two districts in 2013: Talensi and Nabdam. This profile observes the area including these both districts as most of the data captured are 1. Cover Page with reference to Talensi-Nabdam . 2. USAID Project Data Talensi is bordered to the north by the Municipality, to the 3-4. Agricultural Data south by the West and East Mamprusi districts (both in the Northern Region), to the west by Kassena-Nankana district, and to the east by 5. Health, Nutrition and Sanitation the West and Nabdam districts. Nabdam is bordered to the North by the , South by the Talensi District, to the East 6. USAID Presence by the and to the West the Bolgatanga Munici- 7. Demographic and Weather Data pality. Both districts have a total population of 123,983 inhabitants, out of which 62,200 are males and 61,783 females with an average 8. Discussion Questions household size of 5.7 persons. The boxes below contain relevant economic indicators such as per capita expenditure and poverty prevalence for a better understanding of its development.

Poverty Prevalence 17.1 % Daily per capita expenditure 3.43 USD Households with moderate or severe hunger* 67.9% Household Size 5.7 members Poverty7 Depth 3.3 % Total Population of the Poor 21,201

1 USAID PROJECT DATA

This section contains data and information related to USAID sponsored interventions in Talensi Nabdam

The number of direct USAID beneficiaries* increased Table 1: USAID Projects Info, Talensi Nabdam, 2014-2016 Beneficiaries Data 2014 2015 2016 exponentially during the observed period from 106 Direct Beneficiaries 106 2 ,314 5,501 to 5,501 as Table 1 shows. One nucleus farmer is Male 52 1 ,184 3,108 Female 54 1 ,130 2,393 currently operating in the district and 19 demonstra- Undefined tion plots have been established to support beneficia- Nucleus Farmers 0 1 n/a ry training. See Infographic 1 for the demonstration Male Female 1 plot disaggregate. Small amount of agricultural loans Undefined were facilitated by USAID intervention as shown in Demoplots 4 1 5 n/a Male 0 5 Table 1. Direct beneficiaries yields and gross margins Female 1 7 for the district are not available. The presence of Undefined 3 3 Investment and Impact USAID development work is average, with an above Ag. Rural loans 1,663 average number of beneficiaries, decent number of USAID Projects Present 5 Beneficiaries Score 1.0 3.0 3 .0 demo plots and small loans during 2014-2016. This Presence Score 2014-2016 2.1 resulted in a USAID presence score*** of 2.1 out of District Flag 2014-2016 Red Source: USAID Project Reporting, 2014-2016 4. In addition, the district is flagged RED**** indicat- Source: USAID Project Reporting, 2014-2015 ing that while the project presence or intervention is average the impact indicators show regress as com- pared to 2012. Find more details on USAID Presence vs. Impact scoring on page 7.

Infographic 1: Demo Plots in Talensi Nabdam, 2014-2015 The presence calculation 37** includes the number of direct 19* beneficiaries and Agricultural

Demo Plots Rural loans.

4(Soyabean) (Maize) 15

New released Variety, Etubi Crop Genetics, Plouging, Early Maturing Afayak, New released variety, Basil Phosphate, Crop Genetics, Variety, Hybrid Variety, Drought Tolerant Variety, Harrowing, Planting in Plouging, No Till, Harrowing Planting in Rows, Inoculation, Rows, Fertilization, Pest control Fertilization, Pest control

Source: USAID Project Reporting, 2014, 2015

* Please note that the number of demoplots is smaller than the sum of separate plots by crop because crop rotation has been exercised in the same demo ** “Direct Beneficiary, an individual who comes in direct contact with a set of interventions” FTF Handbook, 2016 *** and **** More detail on presence score range and districtflag range can be found in page 8. All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 2 AGRICULTURAL DATA

This section contains agricultural data for Talensi Nabdam such as production by commodity, gross margins and yields.

Agricultural production in Talensi-Nabdam involves Figure 1: Share of Agricultural Production, by Commodity, in Talensi-Nabdam, 2010-2015 Cowpea Sweet Potato 3.5% Groundnut several commodities; sweet potatos, groundnut, maize, 14.1% 11.5%

Soybean sorghum, rice and others produced during 2010-2015 as 7.3%

Maize shown in Figure 1. Talensi-Nabdam is not one of the main 19.3%

Sorghum agricultural producers in the Upper West Region. It 16.8%

Millet 10.3% accounted for only 5.6% of the regional agricultural Rice 17.2% production in 2015. Noticeable in Talensi-Nabdam just as Source: Agriculture Production Reports 2011- 2015, MOFA

Figure 2: Average Yields by Commodity in Talensi-Nabdam, in the other districts in the is the high USG Beneficaries and district's average, 2013-2015, MT/ha 2.50 2.29 2.16 2 2.00 production of sweet potato, compared to other crops. 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.4

0.94 1.00 1.00 0.9 Yield data, presented in Figure 3, contain values of yields 0.50

- of three commodities: maize, rice and soybean in 2015, Maize Soybean Rice Maize Soybean Rice Maize Soybean Rice 2015 2014 2013

Others-MofA 2014 and 2013 as reported from MOFA. Source: Agriculture Project Reporting 2015, Agriculture Production Survey, 2013, Kansas State University

Table 2: Agricultural Production and Yields in Talensi-Nabdam, 2010-2015, in MT and MT/ha Commodity 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 Total Cowpea 715 728 710 1,513 996 923 5,585 Groundnut 1,621 1,800 1,791 4,600 4,330 4,338 18,480 Maize 3,917 3,846 4,148 6,749 6,976 5,292 30,928 Millet 2,300 2,295 2,219 2,892 2,733 2,400 14,839 Rice 5,126 4,632 3,984 4,758 3,077 5,890 27,467 Sorghum 3,815 4,204 5,036 5,064 4,680 4,158 26,957 Soybean 1,678 1,792 1,782 1,980 2,369 2,041 11,642 Sweet Potato 4,859 5,460 6,860 5,368 22,547 Yields in MT/Ha 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 Cowpea 0.51 0.52 0.47 0.55 0.40 0.42 Groundnut 0.39 0.44 0.40 1.00 1.00 0.82 Maize 1.53 1.50 1.40 1.52 1.60 1.26 Millet 0.54 0.54 0.50 0.60 0.64 0.60 Rice 2.29 2.16 2.09 2.60 1.70 3.10 Sorghum 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.20 0.99 Soybean 0.94 1.00 0.90 1.10 1.15 1.14 Sweet Potato 9.10 10.00 14.00 8.80 10.00 Source: Agriculture Report 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, MOFA.Values for 2010-2013 referr to Talensi Nabdam

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

This section focuses on the Women Empowerment in Agricul- ture Index results for Talensi Nabdam

What is the Women Empowerment Talensi-Nabdam Results in Agriculture Index? Women play a prominent role in agriculture. Yet they The results of both male and female respondents on the face persistent economic and social constraints. Wom- four domains are displayed in Figure 3. en’s empowerment is a main focus of Feed the Future in order to achieve its objectives of inclusive agriculture Production Domain: Women feel comfortable with providing input related to production decisions as sector growth and improved nutritional status. The indicated by 89% of the women of the survey sample. WEAI is comprised of two weighted sub-indexes: However, they have less control over the use of house- Domains Empowerment Index (5DE) and Gender Parity hold income than men– 49.5% of women vs 68.6% of Index (GPI). The 5DE examines the five domains of male respondents. empowerment: production, resources, income, leader- Resource Domain: A majority of the women have a ship and time. The GPI compares the empowerment of right to asset ownership and to purchase and move women to the empowerment of their male counterpart assets– 66.3% and 77.5% respectively. These figures are slightly lower than the figures for the male respondents. in the household. This section presents the results from Only 26% of the women have the right to decide or have these empowerment indicators of the 5DE for Talen- access to credit, compared to 27.7% of the male respon- si-Nabdam, part of a bigger survey conducted by Kansas dents. Nonetheless, access to credit is equally low for State University. both genders. Leadership Domain: 85.2% and 76.4% of the women The Domains: What Do They Represent? interviewed have the right to group membership and The Production domain assesses the ability of individuals public speaking respectively. The public speaking indica- tor is the highest percentage for women in Talensi-Nab- to provide input and autonomously make decisions dam. about agricultural production. The Resources domain Time Domain: A thin majority of women and men in reflects individuals’ control over and access to produc- Talensi-Nabdam are satisfied with the workload in their tive resources. The Income domain monitors individuals’ everyday life– 60.9% and 76.6% respectively. The values ability to direct the financial resources derived from remain the same with respect to satisfaction with leisure agricultural production or other sources. The Leadership time; only 70% of women and 75.6% of men are satisfied domain reflects individuals’ social capital and comfort with the amount of leisure time at their disposal. speaking in public within their community. The Time domain reflects individuals’ workload and satisfaction with leisure time.

Figure 3: Results of Domains of Empowerment from WEAI 2015, in Differences percent, Talensi-Nabdam, 2015 120 97.7 96.3 95.3 90.6 Highest differences between male and female respondents 100 89 85.2 77.5 73.2 76.4 76.6 75.6 80 68.6 66.3 70 observed within resources domain: asset ownership. 60.9 60 49.5 Adequacy: Together, men and women achieve adequacy in

40 26 27.7 all indicators but control over use of household income, 20 access to and decision on credit group membership and 0 Input in Control Asset Right to Access to Group Public Satisfaction Satisfaction satisfaction with workload and leisure time. In addition Production Over Use of Ownership Purchase Sell and Decision Membership Speaking with with Leisure Decision Household and Transfer on Credit Workload Time men achieve adequacy in asset ownership, right to Income Assets purchase and sell assets and public speaking, while women Production and Income Resources Domain Leadership Domain Time Domain Domain do not. Women Men

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 4 HEALTH, NUTRITION AND SANITATION

This section contains facts and figures related to Health, Nutrition and Sanitation in Talensi-Nabdam

Infograph 3: Health and Nutrition Figures, Talensi-Nabdam, 2015 Infograph 3 focuses on health and nutrition of women

and children in the district. Percentages and absolute Children Stunting, 20.5%, 3,645 numbers are revealed in the respective circles for stunt-

Only 12.3%, 3,286, women Children ing, wasting, children and women underweight as well as reach minimum Underweight dietary diversity 16.7%, 2,969 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 Women Dietary Wasting in Diversity Score, Children, to the interview. Women Minimum Dietary Diversity 2.6 20.8%, 3,698

Women (MDD-W) represents the proportion of women con- Underweight, 15.5% 4,141 suming a minimum of five food groups out of the possi-

Sources: PBS 2015, Kansas State University, 2015 ble ten food groups based on their dietary intake. The Dietary diversity score of women in Talensi-Nabdam is

2.6, which means that women consume on average 2 to

3 types of foods out of 10. Only 12.3% reach the mini- Figure 4: Household Dwelling Characteristics, Talensi- Nabdam, 2015 mum dietary diversity of 5 food groups. Both values are

Access to Electricity 40.0 the lowest in the Upper East Region. This is accompanied

Access to Solid Fuel 96.5 by the highest rate of women underweight and wasting

Persons Per Sleep Room 2.4 in the Upper East Region.

Improved Sanitation 10.4 Figure 4 displays specifics of household dwelling, evaluat-

Access to Improved Water Source 92.2 ed based on sources of water, energy, waste disposal,

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 Percent cooking fuel source, and the number of people per sleep

Sources: PBS 2015, Kansas State University, 2015 room as measured from the PBS Survey, 2015.

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 5 PRESENCE VS. IMPACT MATRIX

This section provides an analysis of USAID presence vis-a-vis impact indicators in Talensi-Nabdam

Presence vs. Impact reveals in more detail the presence of the Feed the Future Implementing Partners in the field, in combi- nation with impact indicators measured by the Population Based Survey in 2012 and 2015: per capita expenditure & preva- lence 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 Dashboard focusing on Talensi-Nabdam. In 2015, poverty increased by 122.1 percentage points to 17.1% compared to 2012. Population of the poor is calculated at 21,201. On the other hand, the per capita expenditure has stagnated with a 0.9% 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 average USAID presence and a presence score of 2.1 out of 4. Therefore the district is flagged light RED (average or above presence and one regressing impact indicator). There were no improvement in Talensi-NAbdam during 2014-2015. As Figure 5 shows, there are more poor people than before in the district. The presence of USAID projects in the district has not yielded results. There is the need for further reflection and research on existing interventions to understand the reason(s) behind these results, which may help in better

Figure 5: Poverty in % and Poverty Change in percentage points, 2012,2015, Talensi-Nabdam

40.0% 160.0%

17.10% USAID District Presence Score 20.0% 7.70% s t n i

0.0% 120.0% o p TALENSI NABDAM e g t a t n

-20.0% n e e c r c r NO USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE e e

P Poverty Change P n

i -40.0% 80.0% n

2012-2015 i

y t e r

122.1% g e n v a o -60.0% h P C LOW USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE y t r e

-80.0% 40.0% v o P BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE -100.0%

-120.0% 0.0% Poverty/ 2012 Poverty/2015 Poverty Change 2012-2015 AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE

Figure 6: Population of Poor, Non-- Poor Talensi-Nabdan, 2015 ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE 100000

90000 HIGH USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE 80000 70000 s r e

m b 60000 u n

n 72,870 i 50000 n o i t a l

USAID District Presence Vs. Impact Flag u 40000 p o P 30000

20000

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND 10000 15,031

CONTRADICTING IMPACT INDICATORS 0 TALENSI NABDAM Population Poor 2015 Population of NonPoor 2015 ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND CONTRADICTING IMPACT INDICATORS Figure 7: Per Capita Expenditure in 2012 and 2015, in USD/day; Per Capita Expenditure Change in percent, Talensi-Nabdam BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND Per Capita Exp. Change

REGRESSING IMPACT INDICATORS 3.435 0.9% 20% t 3.43 USD e n y c a 3.43 0% d e r / P

ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND D 3.425 -20% S n i U

-40% g e n 3.42 IMPROVING IMPACT INDICATORS i a n s -60% e h

r 3.415 C t u s

i -80% e d

BELOW AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND 3.41 r

e n -100% t u i p d

x 3.405

IMPROVING IMPACT INDICATORS E -120%

3.4 USD e n p t a 3.4 i -140% x p E a t a C 3.395 i ABOVE AVERAGE USAID DISTRICT PRESENCE AND -160% p a e r

P 3.39 -180% C REGRESSING IMPACT INDICATORS

3.385 -200% e r P TALENSI NABDAM PC Exp. 2012 PC Exp. 2015 PC/Change

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 6 DEMOGRAPHICS & WEATHER

This section contains facts and figures related to Talensi-Nab- dam demographics, religious affiliation, literacy and weather indicators

Figure 8: Household composition by groupage, Talensi-Nabdam has a total population of 123,983 out of Talensi-Nabdam, 2015 which 62,200 are males and 61,783 females with an average Children 0 to 4 14.0% household size of 5.7 persons. Adult Males 24.6% The District lies in the tropical continental climacteric zone. Average precipitation and temperature are similar to the Children 5 to 17 35.1% other districts in the Upper East Region. Figure 11 shows the Adult Females average maximal and minimal temperatures as well as yearly 26.3% average precipitation. Source: PBS 2015, Kansas State University Talensi-Nabdam, like many other districts in the Upper East Region has a relatively young population as shown in Figure 8, Figure 9: Religious Affiliation, Talensi-Nabdam, 2010 with almost 50% of the population falling in the age range: 0 to Others No Religion 0.5% 5.3% 17 years old.

Catholic In terms of religious affiliation, the majority of the population 21.0% Traditionalist 46.8% are Traditionalists (46.8%) followed by Christians, who

Protestant account for 44.4% of the population. For more details refer to 6.4% Figure 9.

Pentecostal/Charis Other matic The district has a high adult illiteracy rate with 82.8% of the Islam Christians 15.7% 3.0% 1.3% adults having received no education. 7.7% went through only Source:Talensi-Nabdam District Analytical Report, GSS, 2014 primary school while 9.3% made it further to secondary school.

Figure 10: Education Attainment in Talensi-Nabdam, 2015 Figure 11: Average Accumulated Precipitation in mm and Average Secondary Level Temperature in Celcius, in Talensi-Nabdam, 2008-2012 Education, 9.30% 800 38 724.93 Primary Level 700 36 Education, 7.7% 583.23 575.82 34 s u 600 i c

530.74 l

32 e m C n 500 n i 422.99

30 i o e i r t 400 a u t t

i 28 a p r i e c 300

, e 26 r m p P 200 e

24 T 100 22 0 20 No Educaton 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 82.8% Accumulated Percipitation, in mm Average Max. Temperature Average Min. Temperature

Source: PBS 2015, Kansas State University Source: awhere Weather Platform, AWhere, 2016

All data and information including full citations can be accessed at www.ghanalinks.org 7 DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

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

QUESTION I QUESTION 2

Why are the women health indicators in Why has poverty increased in Talensi-Nabdam? Talensi-Nabdam so bad? Lowest Dietary Diversity Score, highest rate of underweight women; are these issues being addressed through specific intervention?

QUESTION 3 QUESTION 3

Given Talensi-Nabdam’s agricultural production, What other agricultural or nutrition focused health and sanitation figures, as well as results development partner or GoG interventions have from the presence vs impact matrix, where previously been implemented, are ongoing, should USAID development work focus on in the and/or are in the pipeline that may impact next two years? What future development Talensi-Nabdam’s development? assistance would be helpful for Talensi-Nabdam?

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 8