THE CIVIL SOCIETY FUND DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTIONS
Mission East Application for project: New Ways to Grow: Improving Food Security in Southern Chin, Myanmar
1. Relevance of the intervention Objective of the intervention The project has the following development objective: Remote rural communities in Chin State have improved food security and nutrition.
The development objective will be measured against the following success criteria: i) Increased household food production (quantity and diversity) ii) Improved local knowledge on sustainable agricultural techniques and diet / food preparation for good nutrition
Relevant aspects of the context in which the intervention is to take place (e.g. social, economic, political, climate-related and environmental conditions) The intervention will take place in the southern part of Chin State, Myanmar. The country is listed by CISU as a fragile context and by INFORM as a very high risk country. The level of poverty in Chin State, the lack of State presence (linked to lack of access to basic services) and protection of human rights for the Mara community as a religious minority (Christian) and their high level of exposure and vulnerability to natural hazards are clear factors to meet the criteria for such categorisation. Chin State is located in the western part of Myanmar bordering Mizoram, Nagaland and Manipur states of India. The primary focus will be on the areas inhabited by the Mara indigenous people group - including 53 villages within the 3 townships of Thantlang, Matupi and Paletwa - often referred to informally as ‘Maraland”. This covers an area of 1,200 square miles, and is the target area covered by partner Together for Sustainable Development (TSD). However, the areas of operation of partner Health and Hope Myanmar (HHM) cover a wider area in southern Chin State beyond the Mara region, including 4 additional southern townships: Samee, Rezua, Mindat, Kanpetlet, and Tandlan.
Main training and workshop activities will take place in Lailenpi, one of the largest towns in Maraland, where the TSD and HHM head offices are located. However, given that the required travel permits are granted (or travel restrictions are lifted), other activities will take place in 4 villages in Maraland: Lailenpi, Sabawngpi, Peite and Tisi (see Map in Annex).
Social, economic, environmental and political background conditions Social: 30% of Myanmar’s population is made up of ethnic minorities. Ethnic nationality-populated, rural areas of Myanmar have long been affected by conflicts between the militarized state and dozens of non-state armed groups. Chin State is sparsely populated with a total population of approximately 500,000 people, composed of many different ethnic groups. The majority of Chin people are Christian, with a minority Buddhist and Animist. The church plays a significant social role in Chin society, influencing many aspects of daily life. The majority of the population (98% in Maraland) are subsistence farmers, living in rural villages.
Economic: Chin State is one of the poorest and least developed states in Myanmar, with deficiencies in most sectors. The UNDP estimates that 73.3% of the population live below the
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 1
poverty line, and the WFP estimates that 81% of households have inadequate food consumption. Chin people continue to flee to neighbouring countries/states like Mizoram (in India) and also to Malaysia. Until 2011, this was largely to escape forced labour and religious persecution, and today continues because of the harsh living conditions and poverty. Subsistence agriculture is the main economic activity, but now much of the labour force is migrating leaving the most vulnerable.
Environmental: Chin State is a beautiful and mountainous region but a challenging topography for agriculture. There are several natural resources, including forest products, waterways and minerals. However, there is very little infrastructure, with poor transport links and a lack of communication infrastructure. Most of the region is forest/jungle, but with serious environmental issues related to uncontrolled ‘slash-and-burn’ agricultural methods and hunting of wildlife. Local residents report changes in weather patterns in the region, making the agricultural cycles which they depend on less reliable than in the past. The food security situation in the area has been hugely affected by what the local people call “bamboo dying crisis”. Bamboo has natural cycle of dying once in every fifty years which lasts for 5 to 7 years, resulting in food crisis for all bamboo- dependant wild animals, rat multiplication, decrease of vegetable productivity, severe food scarcity and infectious diseases. The bamboo dying happened recently between 2007 and 2012 and the consequences are still felt today.
Political: There is a general consensus that the political reforms started in 2011 presented a great opportunity for conflict resolution and peace in Myanmar since the 1962 military coup brought an end to the democratic, federal and civilian aspirations of post-colonial leaders. Since their inauguration on March 30, 2011, Thein Sein and his administration acted like a government, not a high command or ‘junta’. In the previous “government,” there was no such distinction. The first openly contested elections since 1990 held in 2015 gave the National League for Democracy (Aung San Suu Kyi’s party) an absolute majority in both chambers of the national parliament, who in 2016 elected the first non-military president since 1962, Htin Kyaw. There are great hopes from the population for this new government. For civil society organisations, until very recently, there has been little to no ‘space’ for them to function in effective cooperation with the state. Both TSD and HHM have spoken about periods where they were directly threatened by the military regime and told to stop their programming. Today, the government opened the ways for rural community development in Myanmar through central national and international funds, channelled through local government and registered local NGOs. But Chin State still requires extra permission to visit for outsiders and is not considered to be under the government’s priority states for development.
Problem analysis: The main problem that this project is expected to address is the food insecurity and poor nutrition of selected remote rural communities in Chin State, Myanmar. This means that population are disadvantaged in terms of health and livelihoods, which contributes to perpetuating the poverty and low living standards they experience.
Poor nutrition is largely caused by lack of variety of local crops available, meaning that nutritional intake is not balanced. There is a low understanding of the connection between balanced diet and nutritional health, and women (as household members responsible for the family diet) do not have skills in food preparation / processing adapted to a wide range of crops. Different seed varieties and new crops seeds / seedlings are difficult to obtain. There are also cultural factors that affect the dietary habits, e.g. rice is the staple food, even though it cannot really be produced in the area given the geographical conditions and it is not always easy to access.
The lack of variety in crops currently produced also contributes to food insecurity, as produce is available in traditional harvesting seasons, but not year round. Agricultural productivity is low, and agriculture is based on traditional slash and burn techniques. As well as low land productivity, this has the additional negative consequence of forest depletion. Food insecurity is intensified by the
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 2
remote nature of the location, including lack of road access, meaning it is difficult to get agricultural inputs or reach markets for trade/ purchase of additional foodstuffs.
There has been little impetus for change from authority structures including Village Administrative Committee and Church Local Standing Committee – however in the project preparation, these bodies have expressed interest in supporting improvements in food security and nutrition issues identified.
These problems mean that new generations are not interested in agriculture, which is not perceived to present reliable livelihood prospects. An additional effect therefore is migration as people relocate to seek alternative livelihoods / work due to the inability to raise a living from agricultural production.
As a priority, this project will address: - Lack of crop variety and year round food availability via support (inputs, training) to crop diversification. It is necessary to tackle this problem, as the target population continuously find themselves in a situation of food insecurity and poor nutrition. The target group identified their main problem as the lack of food. - Lack of knowledge on sustainable agricultural techniques, and on food preparation / processing for good nutrition. This will be addressed by learning, promoting and piloting of a new sustainable agricultural methodology, doing away with the slash and burn culture. The depletion of the soil caused by the slash and burn methodology, renders crops weaker and smaller, increasing the issue of food insecurity. In general women (being regularly responsible for the food preparation/ processing) are bound by tradition in their ways of cooking but are not aware of the nutritional value of the foods that could be available and have high nutritional value. - Weakness of local drivers for change – via capacity building of civil society stakeholders, and engagement of village-level authority structures. Community authorities realise the need of change as the communities have been affected for several years by the lack of food, however they are themselves traditional farmers that have not been exposed to agricultural techniques that are more sustainable and can provide year round food.
Food security and nutrition needs are common to the whole community. However the problem analysis and the response designed takes account of the particular roles of women and men in the situation of food production and processing within the Mara culture. Realising that women headed households are more vulnerable than others, the project will ensure that more vulnerable women are part of the Family Farmer Groups, and that the self-help groups (constituted by women) are part of the target groups.
Contribution of the intervention towards strengthening organisational expressions in civil society that promote compliance with rights and equal access to resources and participation.
The proposed project will raise the profile of the partners locally as the knowledge and application of new sustainable agricultural techniques are expected to increase the food security of the population, which is their main problem. The focus on nutrition in the project leading to a considerable change in the habits of the community for better health will make the partners the local source of expertise in these fields. Bringing these changes, which are expected to improve the quality of life and health of the Mara population, the partners are likely to become a source for replication in similar geographical contexts. At the same time their credibility as expressions of civil society will be increased, and the project’s concrete results will provide a platform for further interaction with duty holders on issues of rights and local development. Other key stakeholders, including the Mara Evangelical Church, will also become more engaged in relevant social development issues, including land rights, equitable food security etc.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 3
The contribution of the intervention towards bringing about lasting improvements for poor, marginalised and vulnerable target groups. The situation of farmers will be improved by supporting their production of better quantity and quality of food. Community members who have no other role / occupation except for subsistence farming have low income and can be subject to low social status; this is compounded in cases of illiteracy and traps them in a state of poverty. Improved food production via new techniques will lead not only to better welfare (ability to feed family and avoid incurring debts) but also to improved social status.
Single female- headed households will constitute 30% of the chosen family farmer group members, and the project therefore benefits a sector of the population that is one of the most vulnerable. As well as feeding their family a more reliable and nutritious diet, their new skills and knowledge will also give them better self-esteem and result in more positive perception of them by society.
Land registrations will be in the name of both husband and wife as far as possible. Women’s Self Help Groups will also be used as channels of information and multipliers, for agricultural change awareness, and also for the healthy eating / nutrition training component.
2. Partnership The experiences, capacities and resources of participant partners in relation to the intervention’s subject matter and context. Mission East (ME) is a Danish non-governmental relief and development organisation with a strong Danish popular foundation. ME was established in 1991 and helps vulnerable populations, supporting communities' capacities to organise and assist themselves, through activities ranging from disaster relief to rural community development assistance. ME works in Armenia, Iraq, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Nepal, North Korea and Myanmar, with a particular focus on underserved, marginalised and remote populations. All of Mission East’s country programmes work with and through local civil society actors (as well as direct implementation where appropriate) in order to enhance the relevance, impact and sustainability of the interventions. Capacity building of local partners - organisationally, technically, in project cycle management, and in advocacy and inclusive approaches - remains central to Mission East’s approach. Rural community development is one of Mission East’s core focus areas and there is a track record of supporting food security and livelihoods programmes in Nepal, Tajikistan, Afghanistan and Armenia. These include: food security initiatives to improve household food production, consumption and dietary diversity; value chain development and support for alternative livelihood activities; small- scale food processing businesses; production and marketing cooperatives; formation of self-help groups for community-based savings and loans; and technical and vocational training. Mission East brings two further areas of experience that are useful in the context of partnerships in remote areas of Myanmar. 1) The organisation has worked extensively on projects and with partners in remote and marginalised mountain communities in Nepal, Afghanistan and Tajikistan. These communities have a specific set of challenges owing to their distance from markets, and also their exclusion from development processes. 2) Mission East also has particular experience in promoting development as countries emerge to new freedoms and democracy from the constraints of totalitarian regimes. This experience comes from our work following the collapse of the Soviet Union as well as in Iraq and we consider it valuable in understanding the way communities need to adapt as these changes take place. Mission East and the local partners have worked together previously in a CISU funded partnership intervention which led to the preparation of this proposal.
Together for Sustainable Development (TSD) has been working on rural community development since 1996 (formerly as the Service and Development Department – see below). Their activities to- date are grouped within three ‘Units’: Education, Sustainability and Empowerment, which have each
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 4
involved some elements related to food security and livelihoods, and thus particularly relevant to the content of this proposal: 1) Education Unit – Within this unit, TSD founded its ‘Rural Research and Skill Training Centre’ in Sabawnpi Village in 2009, a centre which aims to educate youth in kitchen gardening and food processing, animal husbandry, tailoring and weaving, brick making and carpentry and family management. The centre also aims to document rural life skills in printed form and promote model trainees as an example to others. The other component of TSD’s Education programme - providing supplementary quality primary and secondary education, and scholarships for post-secondary study has the long-term ambition to raise up future leaders from Mara Communities who can return to their communities with new skills and knowledge, including initiating new forms of livelihoods and improving agricultural methods. 2) Sustainability Unit - The work of this unit is most directly relevant to the content of this project proposal, as it has included activities directly related to both food security and livelihoods. In relation to overall livelihoods, their ‘Rural Integrated Development Program’ has been underway since 1998, covering a range of activities in 21 villages as per each community’s priorities, including installation of mini-hydropower systems, livestock rearing, installation of rice mills, and water system construction. They have also created 70 women’s self-help groups, which encourage group savings and aim to instigate income generating initiatives. The ‘Ratu Ecological Education Centre’ is another initiative which aims to maintain a natural reserve, raise a type of semi-wild cattle1 (52 to date) which are used as a loan option in times of need, and to encourage propagation of orchids for income rather than harvesting wild orchids. The Sustainability Unit also attempted a pilot terrace-cultivation project to improve agriculture. Lastly, the Sustainability Unit has constructed 104 miles of road and 12 bridges which improve access to markets and thereby open up new income opportunities and reduce reliance on subsistence farming. 3) Empowerment Unit – This unit focusses on the empowerment of ‘Differently-Abled Friends (DAF)’ (people with disabilities). So far TSD’s activities have been to provide moral support to DAF, skills training and educational support for the children of DAF. In the future they intend to also provide homes and food for the most vulnerable DAF. Their current work has helped to improve community acceptance of DAF and increase their sense of self-worth and ambition – breaking the ground for this future livelihoods activity.
Health and Hope Myanmar (HHM)’s work is organised into 3 areas which all focus on poverty reduction and improvement of quality of life. There are several links to the specific sectors of this project: 1) Community Health Programme – HHM began training Community Health Workers (CHWs) in 2009 and to date, has trained over 800 CHWs equipping them with knowledge, basic equipment and basic medicines to provide community-based, prevention-focussed health care in areas where no healthcare services are available at all. Their CHW trainings include an element of nutrition training, which they hope to increase and include in future food security programming. 2) Freedom to Education Programme – HHM has helped students with a vision for the long-term benefit of their people to obtain higher levels of education. HHM helps to ensure these students work towards the advancement of their communities, not only taking up new livelihoods themselves, but having a multiplying effect on their community (whether by becoming teachers who provide higher quality education for the children, agriculturalists who improve farming, or other professions). 3) Food security – These activities are only beginning, but HHM has already begun the construction of multi-purpose community centres which are used to promote the formation of community groups for shared learning and to foster leadership and community ownership for finding solutions to local problems. Specifically, they encourage the formation of farmers’
1 Called ’mithun’, these are a form of ’gaur’ or ’Indian bison’.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 5
groups, women’s groups, teachers’ groups and groups for Trained Birth Attendants. Some of these groups (particularly the farmers’ groups) will be a valuable asset in a future food security programming for promoting community participation and an avenue for initiating change. The focus is on increasing agricultural production and reducing chronic malnutrition.
In addition to these 3 areas, HHM has become involved with emergency food relief in response to the severe food shortages in the area in the last 6 years. HHM’s role has mainly been in data collection, advocating for food assistance to the region towards international donors and other agencies, and providing some coordination for food distributions (largely from WFP). They are open to continuing this role as long as the dire needs are there.
Fragile contexts; description of partnership’s networking experiences and capacity to boost the potential for civil mobilisation and participation in the context at hand.
Together for Sustainable Development (TSD) is a registered organization with its origins in the Service and Development Department of the Mara Evangelical Church, which is the only church in the Mara region (covering 3 townships and 53 villages in the southern part of Chin State). This church is not only a religious institution, which provides the spiritual home for the Mara people who consider themselves 100% Christian, but it is also vital to the political and social life of the community. In a place where the government has not only been negligent of the needs of the people for the past 65 years since Myanmar gained independence from the British, but has also consciously oppressed and isolated this region and population group, the church has filled this vacuum, providing leadership for the community and providing necessary social services, with examples varying from caring for orphans to handling cases of criminality through an informal court system. The church is made up of community members (25,000 members), has a democratic structure for electing its leadership and making decisions, is fully self-supported by the donations of its members, and is thus highly representative of the community. The church is not linked to or supported by any particular church denomination or foreign church. In their own words, they are: “self-supporting, self-propagating and self-managing”.
Within this context, in 1996 the church decided that it should go further in addressing the physical and social needs of their community to create a ‘Service and Development Department’ (SDD) which would carry out development projects in Mara communities, addressing areas of need such as education, water and sanitation, livelihoods, food security and the needs of people with disabilities. The creation of the SDD was thus born out of the community’s recognition of its own needs and desire for an organisation supporting social needs and development beyond the church framework and which could extend assistance to other rural communities in Myanmar. In 2016 the government allowed the registration of the organisation as a Social Organization under Union Registration Board of the Republic of Union of Myanmar, under the name of TSD. TSD (formerly SDD) partnered with Mission East in activities focused on capacity building on strategic planning, proposal writing, financial and organizational management, agriculture and livelihoods development. The head of the organisation, the Director, is an energetic female pastor from the church, who is a resident of Lailenpi Town, one of the largest communities in the Mara region. The staff of TSD are all local residents, including both men and women, individuals from villages throughout the Mara region, and people with disabilities. As such, the organisation is both thoroughly embedded in the communities it serves, and able to draw upon the wider network of the church organisation to propagate its development aims.
Health and Hope Myanmar (HHM) is an organisation founded by Maung Taing San, a member of Lailenpi village who had the ambition to address the dire health needs in his village and region by becoming a doctor. Despite many obstacles, and backed financially and emotionally by countless members of his community, Maung Taing San managed to get a high school education, a
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 6
university degree in India, and entrance to a medical school in Armenia. He then wanted to bring his skills back to the community and returned to the Mara area. Overwhelmed with the medical needs in the region, and recognising that his skills alone would not be enough, he established a local NGO which began to train community health workers (CHWs) throughout the region. The organisation has now branched out to address other needs as well, including education, community learning and leadership, food security and development for the poorest people in Chin State. The organisation’s origins and its development have been entirely in response to the needs and desires of the surrounding community, and it has grown rapidly to respond to primary health care needs in all seven townships of southern Chin State and even some parts of Rakhine State, as communities learned of the possibility to partner with Health and Hope Myanmar. Health and Hope is a community-based organisation and partners with local villages regardless of tribal association, religious background, gender or social standing. Health and Hope shares the ownership of its life-changing programmes with the communities it serves. The director and all staff of HHM are all from southern townships of Chin State. HHM is also coordinates closely with the Mara Evangelical Church and has the backing of the church leadership.
How the intervention applied for will develop relations between the partners. The project will give the partners the opportunity for further transfer of technical knowledge in the areas of agriculture and nutrition as well as further required capacity building in their financial management. The project will help TSD and HHM to grow as organisations, allow Mission East to share its experience and expertise with the local partners, and allow all three organisations to understand how the other functions to a deeper level. Formal training sessions will permit the transfer of knowledge and experience, while on-the-job coaching and observations will allow Mission East to better understand TSD and HHM’s programmes and manner of working. This will not only strengthen subsequent capacity-building sessions, but will also feed into the development of future projects to be implemented within the partnership, focussed on four major areas of need in the region: food security, livelihoods, education and community health.
Contribution to partners mobilising, building relations and cooperating with other actors The project will strengthen local partners’ capacity as trainers, and specifically in the thematic area of sustainable agriculture, food security and nutrition. The project will reinforce their roles as organisations that can facilitate collective action towards objectives which are relevant to the priority needs of the communities they are rooted in. This is expected to lead to additional cooperation with other local, national and international organisations on this and other priority sectors in the future. Regular meetings right from the beginning of the project will ensure that key stakeholders (including local authority structures) are informed and supportive of project aims and activities. (see Stakeholder roles in next section). Emphasis will be put on the tie-in between community identified priorities and the project design, and the common interest with stakeholders’ own objectives. Duty- bearing stakeholders and those holding authority vis-a-vis the community will be included as key persons in public meetings. These stakeholders will become agents to disseminate the information to the community. The two local partners will have regular meetings with them, at least once every three months bilaterally and once in a year jointly. Information activities in Denmark, and Mission East’s existing network of connections (including other international NGOs, as well as private foundations and supporters) may also lead to additional future cooperations/ support for the partnership.
The roles and areas of responsibility of all partners and other actors, if any, including each partner’s implementation responsibilities. Partner expertise and responsibilities: TSD will contribute its expertise in the formation and capacity building of civil society groups, such as the self-help groups (SHGs) who will participate in this project. It will also provide the links with
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 7
other national and international organisations with which it has been cooperating and sharing knowledge in the area of sustainable farming. Additionally, TSD will bring its ample knowledge of local culture and relations with all layers of the community. HHM will bring its experience and expertise in the health aspect of nutrition, and its multiple and multi-level connections with local, regional and national authorities, which will facilitate project implementation in matters such as land registration. HHM has an extensive network with all civil society stakeholders and the local communities which will make implementation and outreach to community much easier.
Both local partners have the credibility and influence to reach and mobilise the community to increase the project’s impact. They also have established pilot farms which have been open to the use of improved and novel agricultural techniques and will serve as model farms to the project.
TSD and HHM are responsible for project activities implementation, project implementation monitoring, narrative and financial reporting, participation in trainings, networking with local authorities and communities, sharing of project outputs with likeminded organisations.
- HHM will be responsible for the community farming activities in Lailenpi and Peite and will be responsible for the nutrition component in the 4 target villages. - TSD will be responsible for the community farming activities in Sabawngpi and Tisi and will be responsible for the training component and management of the women Self -Help Groups. Mission East will bring in the technical expertise in financial management to support capacity building and accountability, and to ensure compliance of local partners with donor requirements. ME will make itself available for mediation and support in the cooperation of the partners and will be accessible for support of partner’s and monitoring of the progress of the project. ME will be ultimately responsible for donor reporting and budget management. Mission East experience in relevant sectors including food security, and in advocacy have contributed to project design and will continue to be fed in to the project via monitoring.
Mission East will be responsible for providing capacity-building support directly, contracting agri expert consultants to provide specific capacity-building expertise, management and coordination of the project between all partners and external consultant, project monitoring, reporting to the donor and information work in Denmark.
Structure for project implementation: Local partners HHM and TSD have decided on a structure (with the same positions involved for each organisation) for the implementation of the project by their staff: Director: Responsible for ensuring timely implementation within budget, participate in and lead (alternately) Project Steering Committee, receive trainings, consolidation and final responsibility for reporting to Mission East. Staff management, maintain relations with stakeholders and government authorities, particular emphasis on land registration initiation. Program Coordinator: Responsible for monitoring the ongoing implementation of the project, do regular monitoring, reporting to director, participate in the steering committee, coordination of campaigns and training of trainers, interaction with VAC,VDC and CLSC, lead process of selection of family farmer group members, overview and control over budget. Follow up on land registration. Finance Coordinator: Financial reporting and budget management control. Responsible for procurement control and planning, management of financial processes, monitoring field visits every six months. Communication Officer: Preparing Materials for dissemination, public campaign, updates via website. Recording baseline situation (photo, video); Visiting field every six months, to present to the community the progress and other information on sustainable farming; Editing and printing annual report and six monthly news.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 8
Supervisors (2 in each organisation): Responsible for training and support of FFGs, monitoring application of new techniques, organisation of campaigns, support assessment for selection of FFGs members, reporting to project coordinator participation in trainings on new agricultural approach. Facilitation of meetings of Family Development Committee, Self Help Group and Village Development Committee.
Within Mission East the distribution of responsibilities will be as follows: Finance Trainer: this person will provide trainings in financial management to local partners leading to them improving their capacity and financial processes and systems, resulting in them meeting good financial practice and CISU standards. HQ Programme Manager: is responsible for oversight and monitoring of project on behalf of Mission East. The Programme Manager will manage communication with the partners, coordinate recruitment/ contracting of the consultant, liaise with the donor, and prepare reports. The Programme Manager will collect feedback from the project participants about the effectiveness of the capacity building, monitor the achievement of project indicators, monitor the timing of project activities, manage any issues that may arise, and record project learning for future use. She will also be responsible for the mid-term evaluation of the project. Finance Manager: will be in charge of the project finance oversight. This person will produce the monthly budget versus actual financial statement and will have an advisory role on the mechanisms of financial monitoring and reporting of the partners. The finance manager will also build the capacity of the local partner while doing the regular monitoring of the reporting. The Journalist will collate information provided by the local partners in Myanmar to be used for creating messaging for Mission East magazine and website in Danish. The journalist will communicate the information in language understandable and likely to be read by the Danish public.
Project Coordination: A joint Project Steering Committee (PSC) will include the partner’s directors and project coordinators to provide strategic guidance for successful implementation of project activities and produce quality results. ME programme manager will assist as resource person when needed and possible. The committee will meet every three months the first year and every four months on the second year. A Project Management Committee (PMC) will consist of Project Coordinators and the supervisors. The PMC will produce detail implementation plan of the project and review the progress against the plan. To ensure mutual understanding and coordinated actions among the partners inception workshops will be held at the start of the project. Project inception will have detailed discussion on the project components and develop a detailed implementation plan (DIP) including timelines, quality assurance and accountability mechanism, inclusion, financial compliances. Every month, the PMC meeting will be held which will review the status of detailed implementation plan (DIP), highlighting the major achievements and also discuss on implementation issues. Before every PMC meeting, TSD and HHM will organize internal project coordination and management meeting in field that will discuss the previous month’s achievements and issues, and agree on the upcoming monthly plans. Every six months, a Project Review and Coordination meeting will be conducted that will review the project progress and achievements, quality of interventions, risks and provide directions/decisions on the project progress. This meeting will be represented by the PSC members, PMC members and other relevant project staff members. In the last month of the project, forward looking strategic workshop will be held that will reflect overall achievements of the project, lessons learnt, and devise possible directions/actions for the
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 9
next phase of the project. The partners will present finance and narrative progress reports to ME every 3 months, and contribute to donor progress reports one month prior to donor deadlines.
Other stakeholders with direct involvement in the project: Project participants among local population: The families who will actively participate in the project are motivated to improve their food security and nutrition. The women carry a responsibility for many household chores and labour, which means their time for additional learning is limited. The men have more ability to decide on their daily activities and can potentially spend more time in training and learning (see also target groups, below). Women’s Self Help Groups: Women participating in Self-Help Groups are motivated to increase their knowledge and skills. They start from a point of low confidence, compounded by illiteracy and social status, but the power of collective participation will be important in project success. They will be mobilised to support outreach and awareness raising in all SHGs of the targeted villages. Family Farmer Groups: These groups will acquire ownership of land which will be registered for their use. They have an interest to learn productive and sustainable techniques to improve the ongoing output of their labour. They start from a low knowledge of sustainable farming; they are familiar with traditional agricultural practice and may experience some difficulties adapting to new techniques. The 130 families to be selected will be from Peite Village (20 families), Lailenpi (40 families), Sabawngpi (40 families) and Tisi (30 families). Staff of local partner organisations: The staff of local partner organisations are interested to learn themselves, and recognise that the aims of the project coincide with the objectives of their organisations. They are motivated to see the project’s impact. They may experience fear that a project failure could reflect negatively upon their organisation. Weaknesses to overcome include staff turnover, a low starting level of technical knowledge on agriculture, and language barriers between staff and trainers (English / Burmese / Mara) Church Local Standing Committee(CLSC) : As target groups are members of the church, and it can be an effective and authoritative channel of information to the local population. The Committee has limited resources to contribute and may have some initial reticence to ’new techniques’. The CLSC is not a recognized committee by the Government . Village Development Committee (VDC): VDCs have been established in Sabawngpi and Tisi by the general meeting of the village; the members are a combination of administration, Church, Women and youth. TSD will work with them directly. The main work of VDC is to assess, prepare, plan, implement, monitor, evaluate and re-plan for their respective village in cooperation with Government, NGO and INGO. As they are selected from the local villagers, their knowledge and skills are limited.
Stakeholders with peripheral involvement in the project: Wider local community: The community as a whole is expected to follow the project with interest, to see whether new techniques and approaches can have an impact on food production and health via better nutrition. Food insecurity is a widespread problem, so solutions that contribute towards reducing this are expected to generate discussion, interest and appetite for replication. Conservative community members may resist changes to traditional land management approaches. Land owner farmers outside of the target group: This group owns (in the historic community system but not formally registered ) the land which will be used for the project. They will donate the land for the FFGs, and therefore have an intrinsic interest in what happens on the land. If the project is not perceived to be successful, they may retract their donation of land. Village Administrative Committee (VAC): The VAC is keen to see an improvement in food security in their area of administration – and to receive recognition for this from higher government authorities. Applications for land registration can be sent to Government only upon the recommendation of this committee. They are therefore pleased for this project to go ahead, but
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 10
sensitive to the fact that potential project problems may reflect badly on them. They hold the authority to decide upon local land use and in general hold key local decision-making power. Decisions are however not always made in a transparent manner. Local organisations and associations: MYA (Mara Youth Association), Mara Student Association and Mara Women Association These organisations are among the recipients of project information and are potential replicators / multipliers of information to their members and the wider population. Their activities are focused mostly on policy and activism and less on technical issues. Project partners consider that the youth can become important agents of change once they see that there is a future in agriculture (this will be considered for a second phase of the intervention). Mara Evangelical Church (MEC): The target population belong to this church, and the committee is a key relevant authority group. The church would be pleased to see an improvement in wellbeing of the target population, which is anticipated in the long-run to result in an increase in church income from local donations. The traditional Church may have some difficulties in accepting the ’new thinking’ represented by the project, but represents an important stakeholder in terms of their ability to disseminate information and lead social change; decisions taken by the church assembly will be followed by village churches. Department of Land and Agriculture Development (at township level) : The local Department of Land and Agricultural Development could also be interested to be associated with the project to support their own credibility in the event of project success. They have the authority to approve applications for land registration, and also hold a budget for agricultural improvement that could be supportive to the target group. The Department is characterised by a low ownership of duties, but their disapproval could be obstructive to project implementation. Ministry of Land and Agriculture Development (at State level): The Ministry will not be directly engaged in the project due to its small scale and remote geography. However a positive impact on food security in South Chin as one of the poorest areas of the country could be of interest to them.
3. Target groups Composition and relevance of target groups. The project will be focused around the villages of Lailenpi, Sabawngpi, Peite and Tisi villages in Matupi township of South Chin State. Project staff from local partner organisations are based in Lailenpi, and the other villages are reachable within a day by motorbike. Villages have been selected on the basis of knowledge of availability of water and land, and where the local partner organisations are known and trusted by communities. The villages are also a selection from each of the mountain areas in Mara region. The local population are members of the Mara community, with an average family size of 7 persons. The Mara community are Christians, members of the MEC (Mara Evangelical Church). Most of the population are farmers, sometimes alongside other roles / livelihood activities, with only an elite not engaging in subsistence agriculture.
1) Farmer families Selected families will be formed into Farmer Family Groups (FFGs), with 10 families per group. FFGs will receive training and inputs, and will apply new sustainable agricultural techniques on land registered to the group which will also serve as a model farm for sharing new approaches with the wider community. 30% of each FFG will be made up of families headed by single women, in order to ensure project benefits reach most vulnerable households. A total of 13 FFGs will be formed: 4 in Lailenpi, 4 in Sabawngpi, 2 in Peite, and 3 in Tisi. Selection of families for the group will use criteria agreed with the community including: Commitment to sustainable farming Dedication and commitment to participate in project for two years Each family will have 2 supporter families as guarantee if they fail to work
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 11
Express agreement to sign contract to not produce drug plants Demonstrate willingness to share knowledge and seeds with community Families having 2 full time working members Head of household aged between 35 and 60 years, with age of youngest children above 5 because if their children are too young they cannot engage in farming Final choice will be taken by vote of the community to confirm who are perceived to be the families that would be most likely to share the results of the project. The 130 families from four villages will be trained on sustainable farming, provided tools and equipment and they will become trainers for their community.
2) Self-Help Groups (SHGs): These women’s groups have been in existence since 2007 and were created under the support from local partner TSD (formerly SDD) who are building their capacity and training e.g. in skills such as weaving, soap production, etc. In one of the project villages (Tisi) these groups do not exist, but will be established. There are an average of 11 women per group, and their main objective is to improve the family’s situation with regards education, food, health and finances. SHGs are seen as a vital channel for multiplying and applying knowledge shared through the project. Women are the main land workers, so information on sustainable techniques and new crops can be applied directly in their own farms/gardens. In addition, training on healthy diet, food processing and nutrition will enable the SHG members to directly improve the situation of their own family. To achieve this, the 24 leaders of the SHGs will participate in trainings on food production, nutrition etc., and will be supported to pass this information on to the village SHGs. Local partner project staff will monitor and support the SHGs. In addition, 5 further women from the SHG Federation will also participate in the training, to ensure a wider information sharing about the project and an appetite among non-project communities to work further on sustainable agriculture and nutrition.
3) Partner organisation staff: 10 staff, 5 from HHM and 5 from TSD will receive direct training on new techniques of sustainable farming and the remaining 30 staff, (15 from HHM and 15 TSD) of partner organisations implementing the project will also receive significant capacity building via the project. In particular this will be on the project themes of sustainable agriculture and nutrition. In addition, support staff of the organisations will be trained on financial management which will strengthen their organisations’ overall capacity.
4) Church Local Standing Committee (CLSC) Members/ Village Development Committee (VDC) members: HHM will work with CLSC in Lailenpi and Peite and TSD will work through Village Development Committee in Sabawngpi and Tisi villages. The CLSC holds monthly meetings in the community and generally the decisions adopted by it are implemented by the community. All the community are church members including farmers and land owners whose buy-in is crucial to the project. The VDC is made up of representatives of: local administration, Church, Women and youth. Their tasks include: baseline data collection for village development status, organisation of participatory plan for the village development goals (where food and education are the top priorities), monthly reporting to the Church and the local authorities and preparation of proposals for the development of the village. Two Committee members will be given specific training which will increase their knowledge in new sustainable agricultural approaches and techniques. This will enable them to share the information with the local community who respect and trust them, which will support community buy-in of new technologies.
5) Village Administrative (VAC) Committee members: The VAC are a local administrative unit, who meet once a month, and whose primary responsibilities are: holding legal responsibility for the land and the water sources; endorsement of land registration; report to the government of all development initiatives and their progress and public order. 1 administrator per village will
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 12
be invited to trainings to improve their knowledge on natural resource management as part of our advocacy objective.
Target groups’ view the of partnership’s legitimacy in terms of advancing their cause. The local partner staff belong to the Mara community, they are located in the target area and have worked with the target communities in previous projects in development programming in areas such as health, food security, and women’s empowerment, etc. Both the target communities as well as the project staff have all suffered the consequences of the ‘bamboo dying’ that is one of the core reasons for the lack of food at the moment. The targeted communities know and trust them and the (the partners) will be able to influence them. Their strategic choice to work on agriculture/ food security programming is a result of the knowledge of the target population. The partner organisations are also well acquainted with local leaders and are able to interact with them with credibility based on their knowledge of local issues and the degree to which they are embedded in target communities.
4. Strategy and expected results of the intervention
The project has the following development objective: Remote rural communities in Chin State have improved food security and nutrition
The development objective will be measured against the following success criteria: Increased household food production (quantity and diversity) Improved local knowledge on sustainable agricultural techniques and diet / food preparation for good nutrition
Immediate Objectives Indicators 1) By the end of the project 130 families By the end of the project: in 4 villages of the Mara community have 1.1 130 families in 4 villages in the Mara community access to sufficient and nutritious food have registered land for farming in accordance with year round new sustainable approach
1.2 130 selected families have increased their food production to satisfy at least 80% of their food needs. 1.3 Daily eating habits of 50 % of surveyed sample of families include more variety and contain sufficient quantities of the four most important vitamins and minerals according to WHO standards 2) By the end of the project, staff of By the end of the project: partner organisations, leaders of family farmer groups (FFG) and women self- 2.1 Local partner staff have increased their knowledge help groups are employing new by at least 70% on sustainable farming and food knowledge/ skills on sustainable food production production 2.2 80 % FFGs increase in knowledge / skills on sustainable farming and food production
2.3 30 % SHG increase in knowledge on sustainable farming and food production
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 13
3) By the end of the project, 3.1 20 % of community members surveyed can quote 5 communities, Village Administrative elements of key messaging on the new agricultural Committee members and Church Local approach and are positive to it Standing Committee members are promoting sustainable approaches to 3.2 Meetings have been held where VAC and CLSC natural resource management. officials promote the project’s approach to the community
Expected outputs (by end of Activities project) In pursuit of Objective 1: 1.1. 13 FFGs are using 1.1.1 Selection and formation of FFG their improved knowledge on 1.1.2 Selection of appropriate land for FFG model farms sustainable cultivation to 1.1.3 Land registration produce a minimum of 10 crop 1.1.4 Training FFGs on new agricultural techniques, land varieties management 1.1.5 Selection of seeds for year-round produce/ seed bank creation 1.1.6 Distribution of seeds and tools 1.1.7 Exposure visit to farms successfully using sustainable agricultural techniques 1.1.8 Creation and support of existing rice banks 1.1.9 Monitoring and coaching of FFGs
1.2. FFGs are using new 1.2.1 Assessment of water sources water management techniques 1.2.2 Training on water management to support year-round 1.2.3 Design and set up of irrigation systems cultivation. 1.2.4 Provision of materials (tanks, pipes, reservoir)
1.3. 50% of members of 1.3.1 Assessment of existing SHGs SHGs from the four villages 1.3.2 Formation of SHG in Tisi are using new knowledge to 1.3.3 Trainings on nutritional value of available food and new cook nutritionally improved crops and nutritionally improved meals preparation meals for their family. 1.3.4 Training on seed management
In pursuit of Objective 2: 2.1 TSD and HHM have produced 2.1.1 Training for staff on sustainable farming (soil, crop and and are using training water management and on SEED approach) materials on sustainable 2.1.2 Practical training by doing on model farms at partner’s agricultural techniques and locations improved diet for good 2.1.3 Provision of tools, agricultural inputs and water supply nutrition. 2.1.4 Exposure visit to farms successfully using sustainable agricultural techniques 2.1.5 Trainings on nutritional value of available food and new crops and on food preparation/processing for good nutrition 2.1.6 Development of TOT materials
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 14
2.2 Two information campaigns 2.2.1 Consultation on Key messages for sustainable farming have been organized by HHM and on healthy food habits- health based food and TSD including key 2.2.2 Preparation for campaign material messaging of new cultivation/ 2.2.3 Implementation of campaigns health diet approaches 2.2.4 Sharing the key messages to community and key stakeholders (i.e. MEC Assembly, Women &Youth conference) 2.2.5 Disseminating the outcome in six monthly news to the community 2.3 Local partners, self-help group 2.3.1 Conducting SHG Federation meeting once every six leaders and Family Farmers months Group leaders are using 2.3.2 Conducting FFG monthly meeting improved knowledge to train 2.3.3 Conducting VDC/CLSC monthly meeting other stakeholders via specific 2.3.4 Leading joint meeting of all once every 3 months meetings/sessions. 2.3.5 Provision of update training once every 3 months 2.3.6 Regular progress recording In pursuit of Objective 3: 3.1 Local partners have held 3.1.1 Coordinator meet with each village VAC, VDC, CLSC regular update meetings with once every three months VAC, VDC and CLSC to give 3.1.2 HHM and TSD organise quarterly meetings to share information on project and progress of project share key messages. 3.1.3 Organise meetings between local partners and target group representatives and present the documentation, case stories from other successful initiatives 3.1.4 Preparation of materials (messaging, posters and leaflets) to distribute in main entry points of Maraland on effects of slash and burn techniques and the proposed change Sharing key message to community 3.1.5 Invite technical advisors to the programme to share new approach and have a meeting. 3.1.6 Include sustainable farming progress in Administration report to government 3.2 VAC and VDC, and CLSC 3.2.1 Prepare materials for VAC and VDC, and CLSC to share have shared project with population (CD, leaflets) information and messages 3.2.2 Participation in ongoing events where VAC and VDC, and with other community CLSC present their positive approach to project members outside target 3.2.3 Sharing of progress report by VAC once every six months families via public meetings. at township meeting 3.2.4 VDC shares the key messages in TSD Annual Development Seminar 3.2.5 CLSC shares progress in the Church once in every three months
3.3 Two open days per year have 3.3.1 Selection of date and way of exhibition by the FFG been organized by each members Family Farmers Group to 3.3.2. Selection of FFG leaders share their experience with 3.3.3 Training on regular recording of progress interested community 3.3.4. Training and practicing of how to share key points of members at model farms. experience for learning by others 3.3.5 Packaging seeds and leaves for distribution to participants in training by FFGs . 3.3.6. Open days at demonstration farms
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 15
3.4 Community have been 3.4.1 Preparation of a documentary on the success of the exposed to and participated in project (start to end) community wide information 3.4.2 Singing competition on key messages of new approach activities 3.4.3 Drama preparation in target communities 3.4.4 Mass gathering to present prizes to winners of singing competition and drama
In pursuit of multiple objectives: 4.1 Local partners have received 4.1.1.Training for staff on financial management at the financial management training beginning of the project and are using new knowledge 4.1.2. Set-up of finance system, training and maintenance for better financial 4.1.3 Exchange monitoring on financial management application management. on learnt financial management 4.1.4 Monitoring and coaching on financial management once a year 4.2 Local partners have applied 4.2.1 Training on basic communication skills for staff improve knowledge on 4.2.2 Training on computer application for communication communications to produce materials project information materials 4.2.3 Printing six monthly news in Mara 4.2.4 Printing annual report in Mara and Burmese 4.2.5. Regular updating information in website
How and with which methods the intervention is to be carried out so as to make it likely to lead to the objectives defined, including how the role as a catalyst has been considered
The project has been designed to address the situation of food insecurity and poor nutrition of the Mara community in Chin State in Myanmar which is considered one of the root causes of the poverty and vulnerability of the targeted communities. The project is coherent with TSD and HHM’s strategic objectives and mandates and the technical support from ME addresses key issues identified as the most relevant. The overall project strategy is to introduce the community to sustainable agricultural methods that will improve their food security in the short and long term, with particular consideration to the nutritional aspect of the production and preparation of food. To achieve its objectives the project has three interconnected components: i) increase in capacity of a selected group of farmers in the new methodology from a very practical perspective using pilot farms; ii) building the capacity of the local partners, the leaders of the family farmers groups and women in the self-help groups as lead agents of change in the community through their application of the new knowledge on sustainable food production and iii) advocacy towards communities and influential local leading organisations to engage them in the promotion of sustainable approaches to natural resource management.
Methods employed by the project: In the framework of the past CISU partnership intervention and the training received on agricultural methods, the partners became initially acquainted with the concepts of a new methodology which implies the choice for sustainable agriculture. The chosen methodology called: Something to Eat Every Day (SEED)2- has been designed to create food availability in the short and long terms and
2 SEED started with a demonstration farm in the Philippines in 1999 and today, more than 4000 people (per year) from 10 Asian countries are applying these simple, basic principles to their family agriculture plots. The SEED Project empowers isolated rural families who own small farms to become self–sufficient in teaching agriculture practices that require no outside resources. Crops, fruits and vegetables are grown in balance and depending on context combined with small scale
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 16
for better environmental and productivity sustainability, while doing away with the slash and burn method. The methods used before have proved to be destructive to land fertility and to yield low productivity. These proposed new techniques have proved successful in similar contexts in Asia. HHM and TSD staff will be trained further on SEED methodology3 and apply the knowledge in a “model farm” each. They will become trainers of the FFGs, to ensure project methodology will be properly shared, being the ones bringing the new vision who are going to propose a change in paradigm, it is their vision, they know more about the methodology and know how to communicate and transfer knowledge to their communities.
To implement the new methodology of sustainable agriculture, it is necessary to build the capacity of selected FFGs to train them on SEED application in pilot gardens. Two members of the FFG will be selected as leaders of each group to ensure that in case one is absent support is still available, to give mutual support and to make sure that the message comes across if one is a slower learner. These leaders will be trained to become trainers to the group and will be supported by the partners’ trainers (supervisor). The size of the group (10 families per group) was chosen for efficiency in use of resources and also recognises that the concept is new to group and allows allocation of more concentrated time to individuals.
The partners’ choice for communal gardening, but with individual responsibility, reflects the need to maximise resources like water sources for irrigation, ensure common crop protection from animals and pests. It promotes a shared sense of responsibility, healthy competition, sharing of experience, better future market opportunities and gives easier access for closer monitoring. In addition to the trainings on SEED, land and water management, the project will provide the necessary agricultural inputs (i.e. seeds and plants) and equipment (i.e. axes, spades, etc.) and also support establishing and maintaining of rice banks as a means of providing food inputs to farmers while crops not yet available under the new methodology.
To ensure that model plots will continue to be available during project implementation and beyond, since most of the population have no registered land, the project partners have enough community buy-in for assignation of land and registration of the plots to the farmers working on them. This will obviously increase interest in participation and best implementation of the project.
Regarding the nutritional aspect of the project, the choice in the crops to grow will be a key element. The choice will be made in terms of nutritional value, to the extent possible using native species and if need be bringing new species that will not affect the balance in the ecosystem. Consideration will also be given to the time necessary for the crops to produce so that the results can be seen by the communities and the FFGs as soon as possible during the project. Emphasis will be made in the education of FFGs, SHGs, partner staff and the community regarding the need for a healthy balanced diet and ways to cook nutritionally improved meals.
To advocate the acceptance of the new methodology, establish the ground for replication of the SEED and propagate knowledge on healthier and nutritional foods and how to cook them, the project partners will approach advocacy from three levels:1) a direct approach to SHGs and other farmers in meetings and invitations to see the progress in the pilot gardens; 2) continuous information sharing on progress with community leadership at the VAC, CLSC and VDC to gather their support for the new methodology and the sharing of the messages from these fora to the community in regular public meetings and 3) mass events, campaigns, documentary production and dissemination, singing competitions and drama. livestock, poultry and fish enterprises in such a way as to bring a synergy into the overall operation and to spread harvest throughout the entire year. 3 Topics included in the training are: – Non-chemical fertilizer production; Organic Vegetable Garden; Soil Composition and preparation; Farmland preparation; Organic Pesticide Control; Vegetable Plantation; Animal Feed Production
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 17
The interlinkage and balance between capacity development, advocacy and possible strategic deliveries (the Development Triangle) - including (fragile context) how strategic deliveries underpin capacity development and establish potential for advocacy.
Capacity building: Trainings on new methodology (SEED) of sustainable Go farming and nutrition. Strength od ens pla legitimac nni y and ng ability to
Strategic Strategic expertise forge partnersh
planning ips and
alliances professional
Legitimacy and
Strategic deliveries: Work on Better conditions for the target group Advocacy: Local authorities and family farming gardens communities exposure to new methodology and promotion for replicability. Knowledge and case stories for advocacy inclusion of the target groups’ voice
To address the goal and expected outputs proposed, the project will work to build the capacity of the local partners, the FFGs and SHGs on sustainable agriculture using the SEED methodology and on nutrition. Given the nature of the project and of the participants (most of them subsistence farmers), theoretical transfer of knowledge is not the best approach; it needs to be complemented with practical strategic deliveries in the form of gardens to put into practice the new methodology. The visible results of good land and water management, use of nutritional crops and which lead to a better health and food security year round, will be the best elements to enable advocacy actions towards institutions (especially VDC, VCA, CLSC, farmers and women groups), and the wider community for ensuring the shift to a sustainable agricultural model in the Maraland context.
How priorities, plans and resources existing within the context are taken into account. The project theme fits with the strategic priorities of the partner organisations, as a reflection of the priority nature of the issue for the Mara community. Existing relations between partners, communities and other key stakeholders will be drawn upon for project implementation, and in turn developed further by the project. Existing expertise and structures, for example the existing Self- Help Groups and TSD’s support of them are also mobilised in pursuit of the project aims. Existing land rights are directed towards vulnerable community members (farmer families) who form the core target group. Participants contribute their existing knowledge and capacity in farming and food-choice / handling, while being supported to develop new knowledge and skills. Close community ties are mobilised to ensure mutual support in FFGs and SHGs, and the position and influence of the church in Mara culture is also used as a conduit for information sharing and supporting change.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 18
Possible risk factors and mitigation measures
Risk Mitigation/Contingency Measures
The government will not provide travel Training sessions could be shortened, or training permits which will allow Mission East to participants brought to the regional capital or to Yangon work in southern Chin State for long instead of bringing the trainer to Lailenpi Town. enough periods to carry out the capacity interventions.
Heavy rains, flooding and/or rock slides Travel schedules should remain flexible to allow for will make access to the target area travel delays, and if necessary, activity schedules can impossible and will result in delays of be shifted to times when accessibility will be possible. planned activities.
Local partner staff will leave southern The local partners will sign commitment agreements Chin State for job opportunities with their staff that they will remain working with the elsewhere in Myanmar or abroad after organisation for a minimum of one year following the being trained, and the knowledge and capacity-building interventions. skills gained from this intervention will leave with them
VAC and CLSC don’t remain interested Mediation by church leaders with community and in investing time in project. CLSC. For VAC request higher authorities support.
Not enough water sources available Use harvesting rain water options as complementary source.
Traditional land owners change their Engage in discussions with landowners and eventually mind about donating the land involve VAC and CLSC leaders
Political stability in Chin State (or in If this happens during the project, consider possibilities Myanmar as a whole) disintegrates for remote capacity building which can still have a during or after the project. positive impact. If after the project, find ways to support the partners remotely or possibly from India across the border.
Systematising and using experiences during and at end of the intervention, including planned external evaluations. Project partners will have action plans which frame their responsibilities within the project, including for monitoring. They will keep a record of activities, progress towards indicators, problems encountered etc. via a standard project workbook agreed with Mission East.
The FFGs will also have agreed action plans, and will keep journals per family to record activities and the progress of different crops. These journals will be reviewed monthly by the responsible local staff, and application of agricultural techniques in practice will be monitored. They can also then be used as a basis for learning, as a documented account of which practices were successful and how challenges were met in the local context.
Other documentation noted as means of verification, including SHG records, meeting minutes, campaign evidence etc. will be regularly reviewed by local partners. At the end of the first year, the
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 19
Training Manual will be revised to include lessons learned in the first project period. Project supervisors will collect monthly reports form FFGs and SHGs, the project coordinators will carry out quarterly monitoring visits which will contribute to shared learning. Monitoring visits include observation of project activities/ implementation, verification of project records and documentation, discussions with beneficiaries and other stakeholders. Coordinators prepare reports on the basis of those monitoring visits and these will be used not only for accountability to other partners, but also for sharing and learning from experiences during regular meetings.
Adjustments of the project will be ensured during implementation, will be considered in the quarterly meetings or if there is any emergency case, the Project Steering Committee will review progress and any problems arising, based on reports from Project Coordinators. The committee will then propose changes and adaptations to the project, which will be discussed with ME when sharing the quarterly reports.
The financial and communications officers will carry out a monitoring visit once a year and the directors will conduct a monitoring visit every six months. These visits will also result in shared observations and inputs to project management committee / project steering committee discussions, and adjustments to implementation plan or procedures as necessary.
A mid-term evaluation visit will be carried out by Mission East HQ Programme Manager, which will lead to recommendations to ensure adaptations of the project plan and a budget revision if necessary. An external consultant will be contracted to carry out a final evaluation for the project, including commenting on sustainability achieved and possible necessary reinforcing follow-up activities /phases.
Reporting systems In line with a reporting framework agreed by all partners, TSD and HHM will submit project updates via workbooks to Mission East on a quarterly basis. They will consolidate the reports and then share them with Mission East for comments. For reports due to CISU, local partners will work together to provide the required information. Final versions of the donor reports will be produced and submitted by Mission East. Financial management and reporting Implementation of this project will be accounted for in accordance with sound and internationally accepted accounting principles following ME’s standard accounting procedures and local finance manual. These procedures follow Danish and Myanmar accounting requirements and the guidelines from CISU. Disbursement of funds will be done quarterly upon receipt of Quarterly Financial Reports from the POs. This will include: reconciliation of previous period expenditure and work plan and budget for the following period. Disbursement will be by bank transfer in local currency. Project expenditures and that of ME will be recorded in ME’s Financial Reporting system and consolidated by Mission East Head Office into DANIDA Financial Reporting Format each month. A system of internal check and balances has been integrated into the project as part of the ME’s capacity building of local partners. These will be in the form of Operational Audits. The reports from this system will allow the POs to reinforce their finance and administrative procedures in line with donor requirements and standard organisational procedures. A Project Audit has also been budgeted for in line with CISU requirements.
5. Phase-out and sustainability of the intervention Avoiding dependency, ensuring lasting improvements, continued strengthening of capacity, achieving sustainability
Avoiding dependency
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 20
The local partners TSD and HHM are well established CSOs that enjoy ample support and credibility in the community and are recognised as the major agents of change in the region. They are also successful in receiving funding from different sources and government authorities know them and recognise their efforts. The acquired capacity will make them technically stronger with new elements that they can replicate later. Hence they will continue to carry on their development work far beyond this project. It is expected that dependency will be avoided among the target group as a result of project design and the use of a supported, hands-on approach to improved agriculture and nutrition; farmer families will carry on new methodology by themselves, with the continued group connection, and also be able to support others that adopt the new sustainable methodology. Use of (mainly) existing Self-Help Groups is also intended to avoid dependency in this target group.
Lasting improvements The positive changes that are expected to endure after the project has been completed are: two local organisations and 130 farmer families will have acquired the capacity and are successful in the application of the SEED methodology for sustainable agriculture; they gain access to nutritious food all year round; in addition, women Self Help Groups are using their new knowledge/ skills on sustainable food production; the new methodology has been accepted and is being promoted by important community authorities like Village Administrative Committee members and Church Local Standing Committee members. The sustainable agriculture concept of the project will spread through experience sharing, (farmers, project communities and further to other Mara communities) resulting in better resource / forest management, better nutrition through increased and improved production and new varieties and positive environmental consequences (forest preservation). The Partner Organizations' Model Farms will be continue to be used for training for local community members, seed saving, nursery, plant distribution and testing place for new seeds or plants brought from outside the Mara community. Vegetables produced in the model farms will be supplied to Lailenpi town market.
Social sustainability: Given the current situation of food insecurity it is very likely that the community and the social authorities will buy in, they will see the benefits of the system and start by themselves. Younger community members are anticipated to see the improvement in production and become more involved and more likely to want to stay in their community.
Political sustainability: The partner organisations and the target group are committed to the project and its purpose and they expect buy-in from authority stakeholders of the community. Current political structures will learn about the new system and they will help spreading it in the community, they will support the project as the positive results will reflect well on them as endorsers.
Economic sustainability: Reduced expenditure in buying food and higher production levels are anticipated to lead to farming families having resources for commercialisation and seed sharing for a next phase. Target groups will be able to continue using the new methodology and producing more and better food once the project support ends.
Special influential factors The Mara people are a very cohesive group that strive for the common good over that of the individual. Highly influenced by their shared strong Christian faith, the community respects their community leaders and is likely to accept new methodologies and challenges if the leaders are behind the process. A clear example of the respect for the common good is that traditional land owners will give their plots for registration to “new’ farmer owners so that the project can be implemented. However it is a big shift from the Mara traditional methods of agriculture to the new SEED approach. It is of importance that the demonstration farms produce at the expected levels in order to generate evidence upon which to base future multiplication for a long term wider impact in the form of environmentally sound and sustainable agriculture.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 21
Project phasing As the SEED methodology is a new concept for most of the staff and the communities and farmers, time is required to make the adjustment to sustainable agriculture and to start seeing the results of this novel approach. This first phase project is intended to be followed by a second phase with emphasis will be on the further replication of the SEED methodology in a wider area in the Maraland and further advocacy to extend the knowledge of the community. Current phase target groups will be producing more and better crops and eating more nutritional food, and will become multipliers of the new approach. The planned second phase of the intervention (3 years) will see the consolidation and further dissemination of experiences. The farms in the initial four villages and the two local partners will be set up as resource pools for food security and nutrition improvement of the Mara region. Monitoring will continue and refresher training will be provided to the 6 model farms. The farms will be evaluated and improvements to the plots identified. New inputs to the farms will be considered, such as adding animal husbandry and bio-fertilizer to increase variety in nutrition. In this second phase, assuming that model farms are already producing as expected, studies will be made and the intervention will start seeing a gradual introduction of livelihoods development, with the creation of market opportunities for the four villages. With the shift to a more sustainable agriculture, better and larger crops and the possibility of commercialisation, it is expected that the youth will consider larger participation in the agricultural production of the community. Advocacy aims under the second phase are likely to include convincing the leaders of local authorities to develop a strategic plan for land and water management for Maraland that will be adopted and implemented by the Mara people. The partners intend to work towards establishing themselves as Agricultural Training Institute, with their sustainable farming model, which could also contribute to income generation once the project has phased out.
6. Planned intervention-related information work in Denmark The objective of the information work carried out within this project is to inform the Danish public about the development challenges in Myanmar, about the plight of marginalized groups living in the southern regions of Chin State, and the work of civil society to try to advocate on behalf of these people and bring new and more sustainable models of agriculture production and nutritional food production and consumption.
The information will be described in an article in the form of a case story with photos in Mission East’s Danish magazine, which currently reaches about 8,000 readers who support Misssion East’s work regularly, and will also be included on the Mission East Danish website which has more than 28,000 unique visitors per year in Denmark, including new and old supporters.
TSD and HHM staff will be responsible for collecting relevant story and photo material and a journalist from Mission East’s communications department will be responsible for using the information and communicating about it in language understandable and likely to be read by the Danish public. The information work carried out in this project will make readers aware of and help them to understand how Danish aid reaches developing countries and is used to empower local civil society organisations in the fragile context of Myanmar.
CIVIL SOCIETY FUND, Development Intervention, revised February 2017 22